User talk:Perspicacite

Welcome!

Hello Perspicacite! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! +A.0u 05:15, 4 May 2007 (UTC) Getting started Wikipedia tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Re: Hi

I replied to your question on my talk page. +A.0u 01:33, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Harakat

Hello Perspicacite, I don't think I'm the best person to ask as I can't read or write Arabic script, but my understanding of the Wikipedia style guidelines is that the extra strokes to indicate the vowel sounds are not usually written in Arabic script, and thus are not included here. I would recommend you ask User:Anas_Salloum, he's very well versed in such topics. Regards, -- Jeff3000 02:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Srebrenica massacre

Our article on the Srebrenica massacre has seen lots of discussion because it is a controversial subject. As you noticed, any edits you (or anybody else) make without giving a clear explanation of your reasoning are likely to be deleted. Please leave a comment on the talk page giving the reasons for the edits that you want to make. Thanks, Jitse Niesen (talk) 02:23, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Zimbabwe articles

Thanks for all your copyedits to Zimbabwe history articles. Wizzy…☎ 08:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Ahrn Palley

The sources listed at the bottom of the article are the sources I actually used to write the article. Stop tagging as unreferenced an article which plainly is, it's testing my patience. Fys. “Ta fys aym”. 20:51, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I see your latest gem is to remove the fact that the Presidential election result in Zimbabwe Rhodesia was reported in the Daily Telegraph of 29 May 1979 and then describe this as unsourced. As a matter of fact I think a better source is the Journals of the House of Assembly although I can't remember which page exactly. But I doubt you've ever looked through every page of the Journals of the House of Assembly of Zimbabwe-Rhodesia and every page of the Official Report of Debates to source articles, as I have because you'd rather spend your time tagging sourced items as unsourced. Fys. “Ta fys aym”. 21:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Userpage and Rhodesian Front and Newcomer

My comments originally posted on User talk:beneaththelandslide under the subheading of "Userpage and Rhodesian Front." All other comments were posted here under the subheading of "Newcomer."
I saw you reverted my edit to Rhodesian Front. My edit changed a series of bullets into paragraph form. This is per Wikipedia's Manual of Style guidelines. If you disagree with my edit then please explain why - either on my talkpage or the article talkpage. I also see you reverted Gnome (Bot)'s edit to your userpage.[1] The bot removed an unlicensed image, again per Wikipedia guidelines. It will do so again. Perspicacite 05:07, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

You seem relatively new to Wikipedia. A few things:

1. tags are immensely irritating. You could throw them into the most referenced article there is, but all they do is clog it up.
2. Footnotes are ideal, especially for larger articles. But references, without specified page numbers, are fine. You cannot claim an article to be unreferenced when the references are listed, but aren't in footnote form.
3. Key Wikipedia policy: Wikipedia:Ignore all rules. Common sense should override policy where appropriate; there is no reason to mindlessly adhere to dogma when, in certain situations, it just doesn't help improve the encylopedia.

If you need any help, ask. But please realise that some editors here (like Fys) have been putting in for years, have contributed tens of thousands of words, and do not like seeing their hard work mangled due to a blind adherence to a particular interpretation of "policy".

Best wishes, michael ^talk 05:29, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from removing citations as you did here.[2] Your conduct on Ahrn Palley follows into the category of Wikistalking. Additionally, referring to fact templates as "stupid" adds nothing to the discussion. Perspicacite 05:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

It's not "wikistalking" (a loose, undefined and farcical concept). It's me having the items on my watchlist, noting the changes, and seeing about fixing them. Again, there is no need to meddle with articles. How about actually getting some books, sitting down, and writing one? Much better than removing references, adding countless fact tags, making articles harder to read, and irritating experienced users who enjoy writing for Wikipedia and shouldn't have to put up with recalcitrants. michael ^talk 05:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from referring to edits made in good faith as "vandalism" as you did here[3] as this is an incorrect characterization and a misunderstanding of WP:VAND. Referring to my edits as "mindlessly adher[ing] to dogma"[4] is also highly uncivil. Perspicacite 05:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Again I ask that you maintain civility. Characterizing my edits as 'meddling with articles' is uncivil. I have written several articles on Wikipedia and have spent a considerable amount of time attributing content on Robert Mugabe. Please provide a single instance in which I have removed references. The grand total of fact tags I have added on Rhodesian Front and Ahrn Palley comes out to two. That's not exactly "countless." Calling me a recalcitrant is uncivil at best and a personal attack at worst. Perspicacite 05:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I can't wait to tuck into the articles on Mugabe and the 'Front and turn them into FA's. Perhaps Palley too. You've inspired me. (regards civility, hm? I'm not one for ass kissing, or blowing smoke up it, or adding fairy padding to my words. Straight and blunt: the way I like it. Much better than being a conceited snake who pretends to be civil for show) michael ^talk 05:45, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I see yesterday you referred to Mr Tan's edits on William Light as "idiocy in action."[5] On Pookie (vehicle) you said, "idiots who put these banners in should be shot."[6] On May 7 you said, "remove idiot fact template (whoever invented these should be shot) and fix."[7] And, of course, calling me a "conceited snake who pretends to be civil for show."[8] These are all violations of Wikipedia's civility policy. Perspicacite 05:55, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

There's probably plenty more examples of my 'incivility' if you want to look all the way back through the thousands of edits I've made. But, shouldn't you not be wikistalking? Leave it here. End. Why keep playing tit-for-tat? I'm going to get back to researching for, improving, and writing articles. michael ^talk 05:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your kind words on my talk page. Custodiet ipsos custodes talk 05:08, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Removal of line spaces

I responded on: Talk:Decriminalization of marijuana in the United States#Regarding line spaces after section titles on the editing page (no affect on general article) —Christopher Mann McKay^{user talk} 21:37, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

ezra articile

removal of information even if you are upset of scholarly criticism goes against npov of wikipedia do it again and i will contact an admin about blocking you for a day

--Java7837 21:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Hilarious. 00:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with putting other points of views especially scholarly opinions on other pages the fact is all it was saying was the bible, the talmud, the zohar, Midrash Rabba, Sefer haYashar (midrash), Midrash Tanchuma, Ein Yaakov, etc. never say Ezra is the son of God

Ask any jew you can meet if they think ezra is the son of God this is one of the reasons why i left islam it only provides lies about the jews and christians and then put great restrictions on them because they aren't muslims no concept of all are equal before the law.

Yes I did they are very very very similar! --Java7837 00:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

My ancestors were from Chechnya. --Java7837 00:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

My grandfather was an ashkenazi jew (he converted to islam)

Ashkenazi jews are not descended of khazars see

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars#_note-hammer

and

Anti-Zionism

Thanks for the note. I've removed the obviously false bit. Jayjg ^(talk) 17:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Elohim

In some cases, the Biblical plural noun Elohim acts as a semantically plural noun, apparently referring to multiple entities, and grammatically takes plural verb and adjective agreements. This type of situation is not usually referred to as "pluralis majestatis", and therefore your edits to article Elohim were not an improvement. AnonMoos 18:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Dude, I'm sorry I included 5 tildes to sign my comments instead of 4, but the simple fact is that the phrase 'Elohim 'Aћerim `Al-Panay "other Gods before me" occurs in the original Biblical Hebrew of 20:3 (where the adjective 'Aћerim "others" has a PLURAL grammatical ending) -- as the article adequately indicated before you started messing around with it. Since your familiarity with the details of Biblical Hebrew grammar and the real meaning of terms such as "pluralis maiestatis" would seem to be slightly shaky at best, it's really best for you not to make major edits to the article without discussing things on the talk page first. AnonMoos 23:03, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Whatever -- "Maiestatis" is actually an acceptable spelling variation in some contexts (closer to the original ancient Latin spelling, as you would know if you actually knew Latin), and I contribute to the Latin Wikipedia (which I bet you don't) [9].

On the actual main point at issue, you need to face up to the fact that if you can't look up the original Biblical Hebrew of Exodus 20:3 and understand what you're seeing, then you're just not competent to edit the Elohim article in the particular way in which you're editing it. If you want citations for relevant facts, then you should go about requesting citations in the proper manner (and/or actually discuss things on the article talk page) -- instead of mutilating the article by adding in a load of nonsense which accomplishes exactly nothing (and which I notice that you yourself haven't supplied any relevant sources for). AnonMoos 01:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Dude, if you know Biblical Hebrew, then Exodus 20:3 is all the reference you need, because you simply turn to that passage and it's right there in front of your nose "as large as life and twice as natural". If you don't know Hebrew, then you're 100% dependent on your understanding (or misunderstanding) of what other people tell you at second- and third-hand. I'm sure that The Complete Idiot's Guide to World Religions is a basic elementary introduction which is reasonably successful at the particular task it attempts to accomplish -- but perusing a work of that nature will not make you an expert in Biblical Hebrew word meanings, nor competent to debate the concepts of linguistics or the history of Judaism at the advanced level which is involved in your edits to the Elohim article.

Furthermore, the passage from said book is actually in basic agreement with my position. The fact that the word Elohim WHEN REFERRING TO THE GOD OF ISRAEL is grammatically singular was already explained at length in the article long before you came along. However Elohim in the particular verse Exodus 20:3 is NOT referring to the God of Israel, but rather to "other gods", and in that verse the word has plural adjective agreement and also plural meaning (according to just about every Bible translation which has ever existed). This has nothing to do with alleged "polytheism" (as you rather irrelevantly complained about in one of your edit summaries).

Yet furthermore, the difference between Arabic 'Ilah (Allah without the definite article) and Hebrew 'Eloah (Elohim without the plural ending) might be loosely called a "pronunciation difference" when trying to roughly explain linguistics concepts to laymen, but professional linguists have a specialized technical terminology which they use in such cases (such as "cognate correspondences" etc.) -- a terminology which is actually much more correct in linguistic terms. Your deleting this correct linguistic terminology from the article in favor of ad hoc loose popularization words was distinctly not helpful. AnonMoos 09:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Your edits to Decriminalization of marijuana in the United States

Please stop making unnecessary and unconstructive edits, especially after they have been reverted multiple times. Thanks. —Christopher Mann McKay^{user talk} 01:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Hyperinflation in Zimbabwe

Hi!

You reverted my edit to the Zimbabwe article where I stated that the hyper inflation was cuase by the printing of to much currency and worened by economic output drops. I realise that this is a quite controversial article and that the exact cuase of hyperinflation in any country is always debatable but I do feel that the printing of currency faster than its withdrawal is the major cause in Zimbabwe. If you disagree as to it being the major cuase thats fine but it should at least be mentioned as it is happening in Zimbabwe (see sources at the bottom of hyperinflation). Perhaps we can find some middle ground?

Let me know what you think.

John

CaptinJohn 13:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

RhoZim

I am tempted to write a comprehensive article on the history of Rhodesia and Zimbabwe, but plan to do it in History of Zimbabwe with associated sub articles (e.g. History of Rhodesia 1895-1923, History of Zimbabwe 1980-1990, etc). The work over at the Rhodesia page is a filthy mess, half biased one way, and half biased the other. I don't want to attempt to clean up that trainwreck for a while. Michael ^talk 03:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

References

Are you using real books, or simply using previews in Google Books for your references? Michael ^talk 06:13, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I just see your writing style leaning towards what would be in a newspaper (and was wondering why it is so), rather than something written for academia or an encyclopedia. I see an overuse of quotations to the point where the article feels more like a dozen and one opinion pieces, without coming together into one neutral view.

On Peter Walls, for example, there's a few quotes critical of the man, and then at the end, one glorifying him. This seems to me as being imbalanced, and not a proper writing style. I find it impossible to tell whether you admire the people you write about, are poking fun at all the characters in the 'story', or if you look down at them with contempt. Such is the haphazard nature of your writing. Michael ^talk 06:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Administration

Are you going to continue using this word inappropriately and out of context? I also noticed the "Smith apartheid administration" bit, which is more than just out of context, its untrue. Please tidy up your edits. Michael ^talk 09:41, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Ian Smith

Rhodesia was not an unrecognized country. The government was unrecognized. Perspicacite 18:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC) OK. What do you think would be a new title for this category?Mohonu 20:44, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I think you need to go to "Category:Former unrecognized countries" and remove Rhodesia, because that is where I got the name from.Mohonu 03:21, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Clark amendment

Hi there, Interesting bit of info you added to the Clark amendment article re Israel serving as a US proxy in Angola. (Glad to see that stub of an article expanded somewhat!) However, it really ought to give some indication of when that conversation transpired -- can you provide the month & year? (and perhaps even how long a time-span Israel served as a proxy)

On a different point, I'm 99.9% certain that Jane Haapiseva-Hunter (whoever she is) has nothing to do with the book in question. I googled her name, and it looks like she writes on religious subjects -- not geopolitics, which is (plain)-Jane Hunter's area of expertise. I'm guessing that perhaps you gleaned your info from an article that quoted the book, rather than directly from the book itself?? If that's the case, it would be better to cite the article instead of the book. (That's what the Wikipedia guidelines call for.)

Oh, one more thing before I sign off: it's always good to leave an edit summary when you finish -- really helpful to other editors. Regards, Cgingold 12:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello again, Thanks for the external link you gave me -- it was extremely helpful to have the actual text (as well as a link to add to the article).

I'm copying your reply to the talk page for the article -- and I'm going to post a new paragraph there explaining the reasons for my edit. Regards, Cgingold 13:11, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Great work

Hi there.Great work on Zimbabwe articles. Africa Festival mangqina-Mazondo 01:52, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

That edit to Mobutu Sese Seko made me giddy with delight. When I edited the early section a while back, I thought "somebody really needs to take an axe to the foreign policy sections", but took a pass myself. Nice work. - BanyanTree 05:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Foreign policy of Mobutu Sese Seko

Hi Perspicacite. You are off to such a great start on the article Foreign policy of Mobutu Sese Seko that it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. Appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Again, great job on the article. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 18:28, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Alvor Agreement

Hi Perspicacite. You are off to such a great start on the article Alvor Agreement that it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. Appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Again, great job on the article. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 02:21, 4 July 2007 (UTC)