Jump to content

User talk:JoshuaZ: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
MiszaBot III (talk | contribs)
597,462 edits
m Archiving 2 thread(s) (older than 60d) to User talk:JoshuaZ/Archive 11.
Line 212: Line 212:
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">'''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]''' &middot; [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Single|Single-page]] &middot; [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]] &middot; [[User:EdwardsBot|EdwardsBot]] ([[User talk:EdwardsBot|talk]]) 01:18, 27 October 2009 (UTC)</div>
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">'''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]''' &middot; [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Single|Single-page]] &middot; [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]] &middot; [[User:EdwardsBot|EdwardsBot]] ([[User talk:EdwardsBot|talk]]) 01:18, 27 October 2009 (UTC)</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0002 -->
<!-- EdwardsBot 0002 -->

== ███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████ ==

I commented on my talk page.--[[User:Daniel L. Barth|Daniel L. Barth]] ([[User talk:Daniel L. Barth|talk]]) 20:44, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:44, 29 October 2009

Kip Kinkel

Hello Joshua Z, this is Marksdaman. The reason I redirected Kip Kinkel to Thurston High School shooting was because the article on the shooting gives information on the shooting and the background of Kip Kinkel, I just didn't think you'd need two pages about the shooting. Thats why I think we should leave the Kip Kinkel article redirect to the Thurston High School shooting. Thank you, and please respond Marksdaman My talk 19:36, 17 March 2009

RE: Protection

Hello, JoshuaZ. You have new messages at Icestorm815's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

RFA Thanks

Some shameless thankspam!

User:Colds7ream/RfA

Teller (not the father of the atom bomb)

That's cool; I have no strong feelings one way or the other. The issue keeps coming up tough, so a bit of a discussion would be germane. MartinSFSA (talk) 18:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited...

New York City Meetup


Next: Sunday September 13th, Columbia University area
Last: 07/25/2009
This box: view • talk • edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, review the recent Wiki-Conference New York, plan for the next stages of projects like Wikipedia Takes Manhattan and Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the May meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:40, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 31 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 17:44, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Labor Day!

Dear colleague, I just want to wish you a happy, hopefully, extended holiday weekend and nice end to summer! Your friend, --A NobodyMy talk 03:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 September 2009

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:34, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hoagland

I noticed you reverted my deletion of references to Hoagland's website. Please refer to this in the talk page: Talk:Richard_C._Hoagland#Neutrality -- please comment here before reverting again. Tnx! Nasa-verve (talk) 05:29, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 September 2009

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:56, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prior dealings

Hey JZ. I'm trying to get caught up on all the dramaz and I just now noticed your Arbcom statement suggesting that Undertow and I had some connection "prior dealings". I was wondering where the various smear mongers who are running with the insinuation came up with it.

I don't have a great memory, but I don't think I ever interacted with the Undertow at all. Do you recall what gave you the impression that we interacted? Are there diffs? ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:32, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Until very recently I don't think I had ever heard of the Undertow. I'm being cautious in my phrasing because it's possible that I'm mistaken, but I'm pretty certain we never interacted. Law and I were on friendly terms and agreed and disagreed on various issues. I appreciate your good faith offer to correct the record. Unfortunately, there are those who use these type of circumstances to try and smear others. The extent to which the current controversy is being used to settle scores is pretty distressing. It also seems to me that there is a very short memory on wiki, because the Arb editing under a new account and socking issue was quite recent, and that account's history was never disclosed in RFA or Arb candidacies as far as I know. Anyway, I don't use IRC and seldom e-mail, so any collaboration I'm involved in should be pretty transparent. :) Let me know if you have any questions. Take care. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:09, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Thanks for your willingness to correct teh record. Innocent mistakes happen and we all make mistakes. As I've been subject to campaign of smears and false rumors that are damaging to my reputation and hurt my ability to collaborate and wedit effectively with people who have false impressions, I'm a bit sensitive. But it's not the end of the world. :) Take care. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:33, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikis Take Manhattan

Wikis Take Manhattan
Next: Saturday October 10


This box: view • talk • edit

WHAT Wikis Take Manhattan is a scavenger hunt and free content photography contest aimed at illustrating Wikipedia and StreetsWiki articles covering sites and street features in Manhattan and across the five boroughs of New York City.

LAST YEAR'S EVENT

WINNINGS? The first prize winning team members will get Eye-Fi Share cards, which automatically upload photos from your camera to your computer and to sites like Flickr. And there will also be cool prizes for other top scorers.

WHEN The hunt will take place Saturday, October 10th from 1:00pm to 6:30pm, followed by prizes and celebration.

WHO All Wikipedians and non-Wikipedians are invited to participate in team of up to three (no special knowledge is required at all, just a digital camera and a love of the city). Bring a friend (or two)!

REGISTER The proper place to register your team is here. It's also perfectly possible to register on the day of when you get there, but it will be slightly easier for us if you register beforehand.

WHERE Participants can begin the hunt from either of two locations: one at Columbia University (at the sundial on college walk) and one at The Open Planning Project's fantastic new event space nestled between Chinatown and SoHo. Everyone will end at The Open Planning Project:

148 Lafayette Street
between Grand & Howard Streets

FOR UPDATES

Please watchlist Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan. This will have a posting if the event is delayed due to weather or other exigency.

Thanks,

Pharos

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:14, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 October 2009

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 05:05, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for I Didn't Raise My Boy To Be A Soldier

Updated DYK query On October 6, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article I Didn't Raise My Boy To Be A Soldier, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 07:44, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice article! Now, I don't want to join the army, I don't want to go to war. I'd rather hang around Picadilly underground, living off the earnings of a ....... dave souza, talk 09:23, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the real work (including realizing that we didn't have an article on the subject) was due to Durova. JoshuaZ (talk) 15:18, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I noticed that the illustration's excellent. . dave souza, talk 15:42, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 October 2009

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 04:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conservapedia and the adulteress

That's what I get for trusting Wikipedia! I took the citation to The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church from the lead of Jesus and the woman taken in adultery, so I have no idea what the source says. I shouldn't do that. I'll probably be able to check the Oxford book tomorrow, but in the meantime, I at least ascribed a weaker claim to it at Conservapedia. If it doesn't say most scholars agree about the passage, we'll have to change the main article on the subject as well. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 18:13, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So it turns out the short article in TODotCC doesn't say a word about how many scholars believe the Pericope Adulterae is genuine. However, I found two sources that say, surprisingly, the majority believe it's not.[1][2] I edited both Conservapedia and Pericope Adulterae accordingly. Thanks for pointing out my error.
  1. ^ "NETBible: John 7". Bible.org. Retrieved 2009-10-17. See note 139 on that page.
  2. ^ Keith, Chris (2008). "Recent and Previous Research on the Pericope Adulterae (John 7.53—8.11)". Currents in Biblical Research. 6 (3): 377–404. doi:10.1177/1476993X07084793.
—JerryFriedman (Talk) 04:43, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conservapedia V. Science

Is a link to the conservapedia article advocating baby shaking enough to prove their anti-science stance? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.83.184.105 (talk) 00:49, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 October 2009

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 03:11, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

inre this diff...

No disrespect was intemded toward your fine work. I only wanted to address the fact that use of Wikinews was being discredited as a source by the nominator. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 04:58, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RFA spam

Thank you for participating in WP:Requests for adminship/Kww 3
Sometimes, being turned back at the door isn't such a bad thing
—Kww(talk) 19:13, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Elementary proof

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Elementary proof. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elementary proof. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:11, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 October 2009

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:18, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████

I commented on my talk page.--Daniel L. Barth (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JoshuaZ&oldid=322797209"