Jump to content

User talk:Daedalus969: 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
Line 83: Line 83:


Please do not harass other users to change their signatures when there is absolutely nothing wrong with them as far as policy goes. It could be seen as disruptive, especially in the tone you used at [[User talk:Arriva436]]. Please note that there are more constructive things that you could be doing around the site, rather than harassing other users for no reason at all. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Jeni|<font color="deeppink">Jeni</font>]]</span> <sup>([[User talk:Jeni|<font color="deeppink">talk</font>]])</sup> 19:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Please do not harass other users to change their signatures when there is absolutely nothing wrong with them as far as policy goes. It could be seen as disruptive, especially in the tone you used at [[User talk:Arriva436]]. Please note that there are more constructive things that you could be doing around the site, rather than harassing other users for no reason at all. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Jeni|<font color="deeppink">Jeni</font>]]</span> <sup>([[User talk:Jeni|<font color="deeppink">talk</font>]])</sup> 19:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

== Jaredites and Olmecs ==

Okay--I'm new to wikipedia and can see I took on too much at once. Please coach me here.

The 1st paragraph mentions the archaeological evidence is "disputed and circumstantial," but gives no source.

Then, the current statements, especially in the 3rd paragraph, don't match the actual source very well. Instead of citing sources clearly and with quotes, the language "is said to have" gives the flavor of a rumor, rather than a documented encyclopedia--and the statements are not accurate to the source. For example, the Jaredites were NOT destroyed in 590 BC, because the last survivor was found among the Nephites between 279 BC and 130 BC., and shown in the sources below.

Do you have any factual concerns with the following portion of my additions?

The Book of Mormon describes the Jaredite civilization migrating from the Old World "from the great tower, at the time the Lord confounded the language of his people", <ref>({{sourcetext|source=Book of Mormon|book=Ether|chapter=1|verse=33}})</ref> then eventually operating both north and south of a narrow neck of land, <ref>{{lds|Ether|ether|10|20-21}}</ref> where the "whole face of the land northward was covered with inhabitants," <ref>{{lds|Ether|ether|10|20-21}}</ref> but "they did preserve the land southward for a wilderness to get game."<ref>{{lds|Ether|ether|10|20-21}}</ref>

The Book of Mormon, in Ether, describes the destruction of all but one individual from the Jaredite civilization but does not give any dates for this destruction.<ref>{{lds|Ether|ether|15|27-33}}</ref> Elsewhere in the Book of Mormon, the Book of Omni briefly mentions this individual interacting with the Nephite civilization sometime between 279 and 130 B.C.<ref>{{lds|omni|omni|1|21}}</ref>


Thanks!
[[User:Truthwiki18|Truthwiki18]] ([[User talk:Truthwiki18|talk]]) 10:52, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


== Jaredites and Olmecs ==
== Jaredites and Olmecs ==

Revision as of 10:52, 5 April 2010

1:05 am, 20 August 2024 (PDT)
  Welcome to my talk page! I will reply on your talk page unless you prefer otherwise as usually noted on your talk page. If you are an anonymous editor, I will reply here.
When leaving messages, please remember these easy steps:
  • Use a descriptive subject/headline
  • Use [[wikilinks]] when mentioning users and pages
  • If you are continuing a conversation with me, please edit the relevant section instead of starting a new section
  • Sign your post with four tildes ~~~~ to leave your name and date
  • Please also note that I have a problem with dropping things, but I am working on it, and have made progress.
  • If you are going to use {{talkback}} templates, date them, so they can be archived properly.

Click here to leave me a message

Happy New Year

Dear Daedalus969,
I just wanted to wish you and your family a HAPPY NEW YEAR. Cheers, and happy editing in 2010.Malke2010

Caution

Please refrain from writing uncivil and shouting messages on my talk page. If you do that again you will be reported to the appropriate administrator's board. Also, please don't bother replying to this caution. Thank you. Amsaim (talk)

Re Jim Bell

Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at EyeSerene's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Self-replicating machine

I have requested temporary semi on it, to fend off the IP's for a week until the checkuser is done. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 09:17, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Simmonz is now indef'd for disruptive editing. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:39, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finally. But just wait, until we get a CU, another sock will likely show up. We need another range block.— Dædαlus Contribs 05:41, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but it won't matter just right now. I got the article semi-protected for a couple of weeks, which is most likely why he called us "cheaters" for implicitly blocking his socks from furthering the edit war. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:43, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Get on IRC and we can discuss this further privately so we don't have to worry about making it easier for him to evade his ban.— Dædαlus Contribs 05:50, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't do IRC, and I'm not an admin anyway, so I would recommend you discuss this with an admin, starting with the admin that blocked him - User Tim Song, or something like that. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:53, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interaction Restriction

Per the ANI that you are aware of, the discussion suggests that a few editors supported a 1 year ban, a couple supported 6 months, and a few supported indefinite. It is clear that as a minimum, consensus supports the restriction for 6 months. Davemeistermoab (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) has however sensibly set a review date for 3 months.

Therefore, you are prohibited from interacting with or commenting about Mbz1 (talk · contribs) anywhere on Wikipedia. This restriction is to be reviewed after 20 June 2010 and before 20 September 2010; you will be allowed to participate in that noticeboard discussion as an exception to this restriction. Should this discussion not occur for any reason, this restriction will automatically expire on 21 September 2010. Ncmvocalist (talk) 04:18, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems I forgot to add the "_talk" when typing the URL. Sorry about that! Ncmvocalist (talk) 05:27, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for the revert. - Schrandit (talk) 17:22, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at Dr Aaij's talk page.

Template:Z1

Clerk note on Pwningall sock case

According to the last CU on the 15th, the IP was traced back to a school. J.delanoy was reluctant to block, as there were some good edits from it. I've asked him to comment on the new case. Auntie E. (talk) 00:36, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 29 March 2010

WP:BLP

See [1]. Please accept this gentle reminder that WP:BLP applies everywhere, and the closer to mainspace the more important it is. I'm sure I don't need to labour the point and I'm not disputing that the individual in question had some serious issues here. Guy (Help!) 10:50, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CLEANSTART

how do I go about with the WP:CLEANSTART so I can come back as a different user...?

Ah think I got it so I just put !retired! in my user page then leave that account to rot and just create a new one Blackmagic1234 (talk) 08:49, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yep! Good luck, and happy editing!— Dædαlus Contribs 09:11, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think I will create the account but maybe not edit for a few weeks. Basically take a break from everything lol.. Blackmagic1234 (talk) 09:47, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Signatures

Please do not harass other users to change their signatures when there is absolutely nothing wrong with them as far as policy goes. It could be seen as disruptive, especially in the tone you used at User talk:Arriva436. Please note that there are more constructive things that you could be doing around the site, rather than harassing other users for no reason at all. Jeni (talk) 19:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jaredites and Olmecs

Okay--I'm new to wikipedia and can see I took on too much at once. Please coach me here.

The 1st paragraph mentions the archaeological evidence is "disputed and circumstantial," but gives no source.

Then, the current statements, especially in the 3rd paragraph, don't match the actual source very well. Instead of citing sources clearly and with quotes, the language "is said to have" gives the flavor of a rumor, rather than a documented encyclopedia--and the statements are not accurate to the source. For example, the Jaredites were NOT destroyed in 590 BC, because the last survivor was found among the Nephites between 279 BC and 130 BC., and shown in the sources below.

Do you have any factual concerns with the following portion of my additions?

The Book of Mormon describes the Jaredite civilization migrating from the Old World "from the great tower, at the time the Lord confounded the language of his people", [1] then eventually operating both north and south of a narrow neck of land, [2] where the "whole face of the land northward was covered with inhabitants," [3] but "they did preserve the land southward for a wilderness to get game."[4]

The Book of Mormon, in Ether, describes the destruction of all but one individual from the Jaredite civilization but does not give any dates for this destruction.[5] Elsewhere in the Book of Mormon, the Book of Omni briefly mentions this individual interacting with the Nephite civilization sometime between 279 and 130 B.C.[6]


Thanks! Truthwiki18 (talk) 10:52, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jaredites and Olmecs

Okay--I'm new to wikipedia and can see I took on too much at once. Please coach me here.

The 1st paragraph mentions the archaeological evidence is "disputed and circumstantial," but gives no source.

Then, the current statements, especially in the 3rd paragraph, don't match the actual source very well. Instead of citing sources clearly and with quotes, the language "is said to have" gives the flavor of a rumor, rather than a documented encyclopedia--and the statements are not accurate to the source. For example, the Jaredites were NOT destroyed in 590 BC, because the last survivor was found among the Nephites between 279 BC and 130 BC., and shown in the sources below.

Do you have any factual concerns with the following portion of my additions?

The Book of Mormon describes the Jaredite civilization migrating from the Old World "from the great tower, at the time the Lord confounded the language of his people", [7] then eventually operating both north and south of a narrow neck of land, [8] where the "whole face of the land northward was covered with inhabitants," [9] but "they did preserve the land southward for a wilderness to get game."[10]

The Book of Mormon, in Ether, describes the destruction of all but one individual from the Jaredite civilization but does not give any dates for this destruction.[11] Elsewhere in the Book of Mormon, the Book of Omni briefly mentions this individual interacting with the Nephite civilization sometime between 279 and 130 B.C.[12]


Thanks! Truthwiki18 (talk) 10:52, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ (Ether 1:33)
  2. ^ Ether 10:20-21
  3. ^ Ether 10:20-21
  4. ^ Ether 10:20-21
  5. ^ Ether 15:27-33
  6. ^ omni 1:21
  7. ^ (Ether 1:33)
  8. ^ Ether 10:20-21
  9. ^ Ether 10:20-21
  10. ^ Ether 10:20-21
  11. ^ Ether 15:27-33
  12. ^ omni 1:21
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Daedalus969&oldid=354081275"