User talk:Wikinger: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:07, 27 December 2007

Welcome!

Hello, Wikinger, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Lysy^talk 19:46, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting my images

Wikinger, why you actually care that much that you must top my Windows Me images? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SufferWell1396 (talk • contribs) 04:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because my versions are now really better both in quality of transparency implementation and resolution. I setted violet color as transparent. Wikinger (talk) 12:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinger, reverting my already good quality with your poor quality is considered VANDALISM. My images have transparency and a bigger resolution than yours. How is the Windows Me startup screen Windows Me's LOGO?! Please refrain from reverting my higher quality images with your poorer quality ones. Thank You. SufferWell1396 (talk • contribs) 04:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are VANDAL, not I, because I really provided higher resolution than you as follows:

my 993x282 is bigger than your 425x142
my 701x579 is bigger than your 375x333

Additionally, I provided perfectly consistent transparency field without any white non-transparent smudges inside it. Please stop vandalizing my objective resolution and transparency advantage. Your subjective criteries are really not true. Finally, your poor versions were speedily deleted by admins. Wikinger (talk) 10:29, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kaczyzm and Kaczism

I have reverted your copy and paste. If you want to move articles, please see Help:Moving a page, please use move button so that edit histories are preserved, copy&paste is not a good way to do that.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 23:34, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign your messages. In the future, please follow procedures as outlined in the above pages, particulary WP:RM which is what you do in the future (dropping a request on my talk page works too :).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 19:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Grad protractor.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Grad protractor.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Your move of salwar kameez

You MOVED an article without discussing the move with anyone, and apparently did so based on your gut feeling re the "correct" transliteration. (There is no commonly accepted method of transliteration for Hindustani/Hindi/Urdu.) WP tries to use the most common term. Salwar kameez is the most common term, as you can see by googlehits:

Salwar kameez, 580,000
Salwar kamiz 15,000

Please do not do anything like this again. Zora 21:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saree was analogically renamed to sari. I done analogically from salwar kameez to salwar kamiz.

I don't think you are a native English speaker, Wikinger, because changing saree to sari doesn't change the pronunciation one would guess by just looking at it. (Also, sari gets 13,300,00 ghits and saree gets 1,280,00.) However, changing kameez to kamiz changes the pronunciation -- not to mention the ghits issue. You can't just move pages without consultation based on your conviction that ee should always become i. Zora 21:43, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 21:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grave (disambiguation)

Please do not disambiguate wikilinks to redirects to~disambiguation pages named "Xyz (disambiguation)", as you did in Kilogram. The redirects are there for a reason, that is to prevent unintended disambiguation. -- Petri Krohn 23:02, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:98liteeos.png

Thanks for uploading Image:98liteeos.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:05, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding edits to Septimalisation

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Wikinger! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bangelfire\.com\/, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 19:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yahuda

This article was deleted after discussion and vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph E. Yahuda. Please do not recreate deleted articles without discussion. --Macrakis 18:02, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I recreated this article: [1] [2] because I think that 'Hebrew is Greek' is suitable for converting Arabic and Hebrew words back to Proto-Indo-European due to huge similarity between PIE and Greek. I think that people should have a chance to perform this task if they want to do it. If Greeks, Dutchs, Hispans and Portugals have this article, why Englanders couldn't have it? Wikinger 18:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please respect our procedures. The notability of Yahuda has been discussed and unanimously (except for the author of the article) found not to meet the English Wikipedia's standards of notability. What other Wikipedia editions do is their business. --Macrakis 18:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But what with this English Wikipedia policy instituted for overcoming ascendancy of foreign Wikipedias by creating parallel English articles, if English article doesn't exist while foreign article exists? I at least backed up article at Wikinfo. Wikinger 18:39, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I have no idea what you are trying to say. Perhaps you can ask someone to help you with your English. In the meantime, please respect our policies and procedures. --Macrakis 18:52, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I meant overcoming of inferiority of English Wikipedia that lies in lacking of English articles, while foreign ones exists, to keep English Wikipedia on par or better than foreign Wikipedias. Do you agree with this? Wikinger 18:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adding bad articles doesn't improve Wikipedia. I will not discuss this further -- you are wasting my time. --Macrakis 18:57, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Digamma move

Please avoid pulling any more stunts like that without prior discussion. dab (𒁳) 19:52, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You vandalized references thus I rebuilt them. Wikinger 19:57, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong approach. I've never been called "vandal" by anyone but people who were clearly out of line themselves. dab (𒁳) 19:59, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I called your revert vandalous, because you reverted even good changes. Wikinger 20:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Proto-Canaanite alphabet reconstructed 22 glyphs.png

Much appreciated if you could clarify the license on the sources used? Sfan00 IMG 13:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced first version of image with second version inspired by this source: [3], because its license states:

"Please feel free to use, copy or distribute any material on this site for non-profit educational purposes only."

Alphabet image is my own work loosely inspired by both sources mentioned in image page with emphasis on this source: [4]. Wikinger 14:03, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Captain norton.png, Image:98liteme.png and Image:Norton Commander 5.51.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Captain norton.png, Image:98liteme.png and Image:Norton Commander 5.51.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. Sfan00 IMG 14:00, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's go deleting Image:Captain norton.png image. It is unneeded at all. Wikinger 15:21, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I made rationales for all 98-lite related images except Windows 98 one which is obsolete, and too which is both superseded and replaceable by Windows Me ones. Wikinger 15:21, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I made appropiate rationales for NC 5.51 DOS and NC 2.01 WIN images except those about NC's earlier than 5.5 for DOS, which are obsolete, and too which are both superseded and replaceable by NC 5.51 DOS and NC 2.01 WIN images. Wikinger 15:21, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK Thanks, you can request redundant images be speedied with {{db|Redundant}} ShakespeareFan00 23:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Stigma uc lc.svg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Stigma uc lc.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. The Evil Spartan 16:39, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with deletion, because there exist better version in Commons. High resolution dump of this better version of Greek Alphabet is here. Wikinger 17:40, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Talk:MS-DOS/archive1

A tag has been placed on Talk:MS-DOS/archive1, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD G12.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. SchmuckyTheCat 18:04, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

revert

Hi,

You reverted some edits I made to Middle Bronze Age alphabets, including corrections of some obvious errors, with the odd comment that it was Japanese, and introduced POV statements about the nature of the alphabet that belong in the article alphabet. Just letting you know why I reverted you. kwami 19:53, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your reverts destroys table relating Greek to Ugaritic script. Wikinger 20:25, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your changes appear to be original research, which is not permitted in Wikipedia. Some of them appear to be unsupported. For example, you claim that two graphic variants of Greek sigma, sigmoid and lunate, a distinction which is presumably original to Greek, derive from two different Egyptian prototypes. Such claims require references. kwami 20:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for Itanium images

Thanks. I had to remove the original image of Itanium 2 some time ago because it was a copyvio, and I was tring to get the article to GA status. How did you happen to find these images? They are all improve the article. -Arch dude 16:47, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I made photos of Itanium 2 myself from real processors and added to Wikipedia. Wikinger 17:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is even more impressive. If you happen to have access to an Itanium-based computer system, could you pleas take a picture of it for the "systems" paragraph? the only Itanium system we have pictures for is Columbia, and it's now a bit of an embarassment, as it has dropped out of the top ten supercomputer list. a more modest system, or a more modern system, would be nice. -Arch dude 23:58, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flux (VRML and X3D)

If you wish to delete a redirect, you should list it at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. Best regards, Shalom (Hello • Peace) 13:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

== Moving pages ==--UsaSatsui 19:49, 26 October 2007 (UTC) When moving pages, you must use the move feature — do not just copy and paste the text. If you cannot move a page, go to Wikipedia:Requested moves. You've been previously warned for this before. If you do this again, you may be blocked from editing. --- RockMFR 17:22, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't moved page, because when moved to new name a redirect was created, and secondary move was blocked. I did that because I can't delete redirects. Wikinger 17:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify: the reason for the rule is that Wikipedia is trying very hard to comply with copyright law. To do this under the GFDL, we must honor the "attribution" clause, and we must therefore maintain a history of which content was added by which specific editors. "We" (the collective group-mind that maintains Wikipedia) have reached a consensus that the edit history constitutes a proper record of which editor has contributed each portion of the content. Yes, this is problematical, but it is also the current consensus. Therefore, "we" have made the rule that cut-and-past "moves" are not permitted. In the future, please consider asking an administrator to do the move to kill the offending redirect. You will probably get a very quick response if the proposed action is reasonable. Please do not get discouraged from editing. We desperately need you to help us. If you ever find that the procedures are interfering with your ability or desire to help, please discuss your frustration with another editor, (me, or someone on the help desk.) I personally find the "redirect" rule very frustrating, so I have avoided making a certain class of improvements to Wikipedia. -Arch dude 00:14, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't remove the RFD notice until the RFD is done. Thanks. --UsaSatsui 19:49, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Windows ME logos

Please remove dot between M and E

Removed ! :-) > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 18:41, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for dot removal. Now logo looks correct Wikinger (talk) 18:44, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You mistaked and wrote Ad Server instead of Adv Server

And Done! > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 18:11, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, earlier I made that mistake and though I re-uploaded it with Adv the cache hasn't refreshed yet... > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 07:42, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for information. Wikinger (talk) 11:34, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BadXP

Please do not return the external link to BadXP. The link is nothing more than one guy's rantings about Windows. I understand you're trying to maintain a reference to prove BadXP actually existed, but this link actually doesn't accomplish that. Reliable sources are needed to truly verify existence and notability. It is generally the case that one person's unreviewed writings are not reliable sources, and one person's barely coherent rantings are never reliable sources. Further, the external links guideline prohibits this link on several points, specifically points 2, 12, and possibly 14 in the reasons not to include a link. Thank you. Someguy1221 (talk) 19:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Ruch Chorzów.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ruch Chorzów.svg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changing own and others comment

Hi, please do not change others comment if you have not their permission as you did here. Also if you want to change your own comment, please use strike-through or a place-holder as said on WP:TALK#Own_comments. Thank you. Carlosguitar ^{(ready and willing)} 19:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did this only for avoiding accidental creating of new article under name other than BadWindows. Wikinger (talk) 20:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same as User:Piast?

Are you the same individual as User:Piast? If so, there isn't necessarily anything wrong with that -- but if your editing activities with the two separate accounts overlap (as they've done with the Emmerich Trinity SVG graphics, Image:BadXP_no_littering.svg, Image:Beginning and End.svg‎, etc.), then you're pretty much required to openly state that the same person is behind both accounts... AnonMoos (talk) 16:15, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greek alphabet

You could always archive part of the talk page... FilipeS (talk) 21:10, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I first optimized Greek alphabet talk page code, to make future archive smaller. Wikinger (talk) 21:23, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Judith

Do you like Song of Songs and Book of Judith? I'm sure yes. Then, how can you be against sexuality? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.21.69.129 (talk) 19:31, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sexuality is provisory. Human race before original sin was designed to be created directly by God. We are future replacement angels to be assigned in Heaven onto place of fallen angels. That all is written in Anne Catherine Emmerich's private revelations. Wikinger (talk) 19:38, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In your scriptures God incarnated as Judith and seduced and killed men. I cannot believe God acts like that, because it resembles me of Greek pagan gods. Only Islam is the true religion. As for Emmerich, it was surely a jinn who talked to her to drive people astray. The whole Truth is here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.21.69.129 (talk) 19:31, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are in extremely grave error, because God - Holy Trinity, (Allah - ath-Thaluth al-Muqaddas), that has shape of three concentrically nested and permeating full spheres, as in Image:Holy_Trinity_scheme.svg that incarnated Himself only as Jesus Christ inside His body, specifically in middle of His head, and in nowhere else, commanded to kill ONLY to push off hardened people from their sins by forcing their souls to convert by suffering and death of their bodies, while placing their souls in Purgatory for cleansing them from their sins, as was in case of Deluge, from which they are later going to Heaven. God takes such souls to Hell ONLY in cases of failing to convert most extremely hardened sinners that are self-freezed in their unrepentance for eternity. Anne Catherine Emmerich is holy Prophet of Almighty God (she revealed that Proto-Indo-European was Divine/Adamic language: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Adamic_language/archive1 ), because besides Biblical Prophets, God has many more today prophets such as Vassula Ryden http://www.tlig.org , Louise Starr Tomkiel http://www.giftstor.org/tomkiel05fst.html (most current prophet known by me - new revelations are provided at least monthly) , and so on... Your faith is one of many esoteric/occult agendas and is not true at all, because provides false facts, in ways similar to magic works of Zecharia Sitchin and Erich von Däniken. Wikinger (talk) 12:53, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Islam does not support occultists. Emmerich, Sitchin, Däniken and other pagans are now in hell because they disbelieved in the Qur'an given to the Holy Prophet Muhammad by Allah. And by saying that God is a Trinity you deny what the Qur'an says and commit shirk (polytheism). Jesus p.b.u.h. was a Prophet and not any incarnation of any God. Stalin and Hitler were Christians too. Muslims are free from such criminals.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.21.69.129 (talk) 19:31, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not true at all. Your faith supports esoteric/occult Sufism. Emmerich is blessed and in Heaven, while Sitchin and Däniken are spreading their occult propaganda. Your prophet and his book that is comparable to Sufic Al-Azif by Abdul Alhazred that comes from the same masonic underground agenda as Sitchin and Däniken, are false, because contradicts Catholic Doctrine including Bible and Private Revelations. Image:Holy_Trinity_scheme.svg depicts single, but compound God, that was incarnated as Jesus Christ, but never three single separated Gods, thus Shirk (polytheism) doesn't occur. Hitler and Stalin became masons associated with Guido von List occult society, while Hitler was in alliance with your co-believers during World War II. Your faith features Osama bin Laden - one of biggest recent criminals ever. My creed is as follows: "I confess that there are no false gods but there is One True God - Holy Trinity, and I confess that Peter is the first pope of One True God." Wikinger (talk) 16:23, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Book of Judith and Song of Songs are violent pornographic texts that are base of your polytheistic Catholic religion. Your church supports pedophilia. Chechens did not collaborate with Adolf Hitler, this was only propaganda spread by the USSR. What Osama bin Laden does is deplorable, but his actions are condoned nowhere in the Koran. Death penalty is indeed mentioned in the Koran, but only for real criminals who truly deserve it like murderers and pedophiles. 83.21.5.6 (talk) 14:09, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You still provide untruth, because Book of Judith and Song of Songs are porn-free, and because there exists One Compound God that due to His indestructibility is impossible to disassemble to separate spheres. In my church pedophilia is supported by masons that are infiltrating Catholic Church as false priests, but not by true priests at all. Adolf Hitler promoted Islamic insurgence to crush his opponents, even Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Mohammad Amin al-Husayni collaborated with Hitler. A book of your prophet promotes porn in form of Houris. Wikinger (talk) 14:49, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Houris are not porn because they will be wives of the believers. Marriage is not porn and celibacy of your priests is extremely unnatural and makes very likely that they commit the sin of masturbation. And let me quote your Bible:

[1]"I'm a walled-in virgin still, but my breasts are full — And when my lover sees me, he knows he'll soon be satisfied." [5]

[2]"My lover is to me a sachet of myrrh resting between my breasts." [6]

If this is not porn I don't know what it is. I'm sure you are disgusted with this ancient Jewish erotic poetry which your church promotes as divine, just as I am. 83.21.5.6 (talk) 16:04, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Houris are pornographic because of their harem-related XXX status. Harems were brothels at all.

[1] is only providing of milk from breasts to friend, as child suckles milk from breasts of his mother.

[2] is only placing of head between breasts, as child places head on breasts of his mother.

Finally, your houris-featured faith breaks God's commandments illustrated by No Rape and No Porn signs.Wikinger (talk) 17:08, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is worth noting that Arabic is the original language of the Quran, and, since the Quran is the eternal word of God according to most Islamic scholars, it logically follows that Arabic is God's own language. 83.21.5.6 14:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are in error, because Proto-Indo-European was instead both Divine/Adamic according to Anne Catherine Emmerich's Catholic private revelations: [7] God currently uses confused tongues to communicate with us, but this situation is only temporary: [8] Wikinger 14:53, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So maybe this Proto-Indo-European was simply other name for Arabic. It would satisfy both Christians and Muslims. 83.21.51.90 (talk) 16:25, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Confused Arabic words are derived from unconfused Proto-Indo-European words. For example. PIE *appa- and *amma- are original forms of Arabic "abu" and "umm" which on both sides means "father" and "mother". It is possible to find PIE and Semitic pairs of words that are nearly identical both in sounding and meaning. Proof of this fact that is based on Anne Catherine Emmerich's Catholic private revelations is explained here:[9] Wikinger (talk) 17:57, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I read Emmerich's revelations and they are free from porn, frivolity and contradictions, so now I am convinced that they come from God. It seems that your religion is the true one and I was in error. 83.21.51.90 (talk) 18:25, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even God as depicted by Anne Catherine Emmerich in Image:Holy_Trinity_scheme.svg is really only One, but Compound God because He is consisted of three concentrically placed fully spherical and unseparatable Persons. Each Person is sharing relevant common part of own volume with volume of another Persons inside God. Catholic Bible of course is true, but omits many important details that are available in Catholic private revelations such as Emmerich's ones. Jesus as God Incarnated is a concentrical sum of abovementioned Compound One God in Three Persons, human soul and human body, with common middle in middle of His human head. Wikinger (talk) 18:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! 83.21.51.90 (talk) 21:21, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Adamic language. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Dreadstar † 14:57, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted, because Slrubenstein vandalized article by blanking content. He too got beyond 3RR. I simply tried to protect article from blanking. Wikinger (talk) 14:59, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with your assertion of vandalism by User:Slrubenstein - a well-established editor and administrator, please assume good faith - I'd also suggest reading through Wikipedia:Avoid the word "vandal". Please provide diffs of the 3RR violation you believe occurred and I'll look into it. Dreadstar † 15:41, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please look into provided diffs - Slrubenstein really vandalized article content more than three times by blanking even sourced parts - here are proofs: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7, keeping only part of content that was at that time unsourced. Wikinger (talk) 15:48, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They appear to be good faith edits to remove WP:OR from the article, which is not vandalism. Please provide the exact diffs you believe violate WP:3RR. Dreadstar † 16:01, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These edits cannot be good faith edits to remove WP:OR, possibly except edit 4, which has now relevant citation, because in these edits except edit 4, Emmerich-related text was deleted even when it had relevant citation. Wikinger (talk) 16:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 216: / Line 216: @@
 :::Please look into provided diffs - Slrubenstein really vandalized article content more than three times by blanking even sourced parts - here are proofs: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adamic_language&diff=179960685&oldid=179951173 1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adamic_language&diff=179993324&oldid=179985245 2] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adamic_language&diff=179994250&oldid=179993937 3] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adamic_language&diff=179997619&oldid=179994838 4] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adamic_language&diff=180032436&oldid=180007394 5] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adamic_language&diff=180257766&oldid=180122142 6] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adamic_language&diff=180281632&oldid=180269104 7], keeping only part of content that was at that time unsourced. [[User:Wikinger|Wikinger]] ([[User talk:Wikinger#top|talk]]) 15:48, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 ::::They appear to be [[WP:AGF|good faith]] edits to remove [[WP:OR]] from the article, which is ''not'' [[WP:VANDAL|vandalism]].  Please provide the exact diffs you believe violate [[WP:3RR]].  [[User:Dreadstar|Dreadstar]] <small>[[User talk:Dreadstar|<span class="Unicode">†</span>]]</small> 16:01, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
-:::::These edits cannot be [[WP:AGF|good faith]] edits to remove [[WP:OR]], possibly except edit 4, which has now relevant citation, because in these edits except edit 4, Emmerich-related text was deleted even if it has relevant citation. [[User:Wikinger|Wikinger]] ([[User talk:Wikinger#top|talk]]) 16:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
+:::::These edits cannot be [[WP:AGF|good faith]] edits to remove [[WP:OR]], possibly except edit 4, which has now relevant citation, because in these edits except edit 4, Emmerich-related text was deleted even when it had relevant citation. [[User:Wikinger|Wikinger]] ([[User talk:Wikinger#top|talk]]) 16:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)