User talk:Luke 19 Verse 27

Justin Martyr revert

Hi, no you're right, I see I didn't give a reason for revert in edit summary. Here it is: Because (i) Nishidani's source, Yadin, does use the word "Palestinian thinker", and (ii) because I respect Nishidani as an editor. And (iii), if I'm honest, because of your awful violent user name I suppose, yes yes counter WP:AGF and all that, but then that user name wasn't chosen to generate AGF was it? In ictu oculi (talk) 12:09, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

I respect your desire to follow sources, but RS is only RS when it is used in context. The article already says he was born in Palestine in the second sentence of the body. There is no additional need to insert "Palestinian" into the lede. This is redundant and may be confused with an ethnic term.

I had misgivings about my username. I'll take the quote off my userpage.Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 16:34, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Most people won't recognise it, I did. But you can ask an Admin to change it, to 19:17 or 19:37 perhaps. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:00, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Ezekial 23:20 maybe? I went on the assumption that anyone who could recognize the verse, like you, would also know the deeper meaning. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 23:57, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Khalid Yassin

Just a small thanks for making sane and neutral improvements on an article I earlier have contributed to. --Caygill (talk) 12:18, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

My pleasure. He's a fascinating character. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 12:26, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Your username

You should spend some time on this article Parable of the talents or minas. Oncenawhile (talk) 22:21, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

This actually means what it says

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Yes, you do have the right to respond, but not on a closed archive. If you're serious about asking a question and not just trying to have the last word, go to a talk page, as directed above. Marrante (talk) 15:18, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

You made a personal attack in your final comments. As per civility, I have a right to respond. Let the archive stand, it will just go away, and so will you. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust, the Lord giveth, aye, and He taketh away.

A Haiku,

Seas are eternal

But words on Wiki are sand

So dont get butt hurt

Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 19:19, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Wow...

Falsely claiming that I had left personal attacks on this page or that anyone had left personal attacks anywhere usually does not go down well. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Barts1a&diff=486716889&oldid=486707954 . Also: On your userspace you are entitled to remove messages without responding if you so desire. In fact; removal of a message without response is seen as having read it. There is no need to reinsert it. Barts1a / Talk to me / Help me improve 23:58, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Your personal attack was calling me racist.

I reposted on your talk page because it was inappropriate of you to delete my comment and then post here. But I'll let you have your bottle. Now, will you tell me where you get off telling me verifiable info needs seven days of talk before it has your approval? Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 00:07, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

The commentary is NOT verifiable. The 7 days of discussion was to ensure that you had consensus to insert the POV commentary before you did so. Bear in mind that should you reinsert it at all -consensus or not- you will probably find yourself blocked for POV pushing. Barts1a / Talk to me / Help me improve 00:32, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Maybe I was a little too harsh... sorry! Barts1a / Talk to me / Help me improve 11:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Barts1a, calling it "POV pushing" is probably accurate, but calling it "racist" indicates you don't understand the sarcasm behind it. L19V27 is not being racist, he's making fun of people who think like that. The article isn't the place to do it, of course. But perhaps you can better understand his annoyance at being incorrectly called a racist. That's generally something you really want to be careful about calling someone. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:42, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Right... Edit warring to reinsert the "sarcastic" comment and treating it as fact is acceptable because it was only meant as "sarcasm"(!)... Barts1a / Talk to me / Help me improve 00:46, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Sigh. No, you've misunderstood a simple declarative English sentence once again. I've left a note for WTT, perhaps he can talk about this with you. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:48, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

As I posted on my mentor's talk page: "I just don't understand how making a "sarcastic" comment and reverting it's removal TWICE in a matter VERY similar to edit warring can still have the comment being interpreted as "sarcasm"!" Barts1a / Talk to me / Help me improve 00:52, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Watch the video. He says, "Soldiers are coming, yay!" and then everyone cheers. It is important to make reference to this in the article because many critics of the video note that this makes it seem like the filmmakers are saying white guys with guns can solve brown people's problems. But luckily you pointed out to me that some people can't catch satire. Silly me, I'll readd the edit, minus the offending word, "white". Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 00:59, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

No, don't re-add the edit, since people have disagreed with it. Discuss on the talk page first, and gain consensus beforehand. Doing otherwise is edit warring, and will probably lead to a block. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:01, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

That is sound advice. You are right that I've strayed close to edit-warring. But I think the word "white" was the only problem. Mentioning the video's championing of international military intervention is important. If someone wants to contest it, then I'll go to the talk. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 01:15, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, I'd say re-adding it at this point, with or without "white", is unwise. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:31, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I would like to apologize for labelling you as a ... "R word". I realize that was a little bit harsh and for that I apologize. Barts1a / Talk to me / Help me improve 11:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I'm Barts1a's mentor. I just thought I'd pop in for a chat. Firstly, I'm not impressed with Barts1a's handling of this situation, and I will have having some words with him. There are however, some issues I'd like to discuss with you too. I'm sure you know wikipedia is meant to be neutral and verifiable - it's also meant to make changes by consensus. It's one thing adding a bold edit, but if that edit is reverted, you should be discussing it on the talk page. Maybe "7 days" discussion is excessive, but "no discussion" is worse. As far as I can see, you haven't edited the talk page once, certainly not in the last month. As for verifiable - if you want to put contentious information into an article, then it's not unreasonable to ask for a source for that information. A reliable source. You've strayed a long way into edit warring, and if you carry on, you will be blocked. Oh and, your username is provocative - if you carry on editing in this sort of manner, I am certain you won't be here long. Perhaps changing it would a good idea? Worm^TT · (talk) 07:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

First, I'd like to thank everybody for popping in. Second, I felt like each of my edits contained an edit summary that adequately explained my position. I've listened to what you guys are says, and stand on my earlier statement that my edit is verifiable (watch the video) and without the word "white", uncontroversial. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 00:04, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Furry female vs. female fursuit

Please see Talk:Furry fandom#Furry female vs. female fursuit. GreenReaper (talk) 01:13, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

L Ron Hubbard

I'm trying to think about how an average reader would most likely identify L Ron Hubbard. Religious leader seems a bit of an overstatement, but I'm not sure exactly what "adventurer" means in this context. Do you mean simply "one who gets into adventurers"? Maybe in the end most people identify him as being an author. --Laser brain (talk) 02:11, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Here is the sentence... [Hubbard] was an American pulp fiction author and adventurer who founded the Church of Scientology.

I think replacing "adventurer" with "religious leader" would be redundant, since the sentence notes the Church of Scientology. Author is probably his number 1 claim to fame, but adventurer I think shows some of his personality. He spent a good deal of his life chasing adventure, and making up stories about what happened on said adventure.

Even during his Sea Org days, he was adventuring.

I think I'm starting to show a bias. You make a good point, but adventurer in the lead, I think, sums up parts of his life that defy description. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 06:39, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you that "adventurer" is more apt in this case. But, it looks like you got reverted by another editor. --Laser brain (talk) 14:07, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not gonna fight it too hard, but it always seemed to me like Hubbard wished he was one of the heroes of his pulps. He dashed off to parts unknown, but his time and place was just a bit too late in history. What a tragic clown. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 05:06, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:L. Ron Hubbard are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Aaron Booth (talk) 05:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Is this about mentioning balls? Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 05:03, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Lol

I await stanza two. It's not really fair on Nishi; for every facetious quip, Nishi insists on responding with a painstakingly constructed essay, and I think you should go easy on him.
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 18:53, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

• @Luke: Please stop posting commentary at Nishidani's talk (it's pretty clear that he is tired of it). If you could mount an actual argument you would have his full attention, but you haven't said anything of substance. Also, just making points without responding to the substance of matters he has raised is not a satisfactory way to conduct a discussion. Johnuniq (talk) 04:27, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I've seen better doggerel on a dunny wall. Only sonnets are accepted here as forms of address, so I'll have to remove it, and this thread to the archives tomorrow unless you can improve the conceit beyond the nursery-rhyme level of composition.Nishidani (talk) 20:06, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

You interpreted the above to mean that he was tired of his circus-like talkpage and my clown-like behavior on it? No, I think he was trying to antagonize me into saying something outrageous that he could take to a ban board, like calling him a racist. Wait, he called me and all Zionists (a group that I am not a member of) tribal racists. Maybe you've come to the wrong talkpage complaining about people's words. Also, in any Wikipedia dispute a person may rest on what they've already written to prove a point. Not all of Nishidani's dumb tits deserve a tat.

But seriously, thanks for stopping by and I hope you continue in this River of Love with me for all eternity. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 05:01, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I have seen several people completely misunderstand Nishidani—that's a shame because he has a lot of useful information to contribute (although I think you'll find he is much more interested in knowledge than in squabbling about who is or is not a racist). You don't have to agree with his conclusions, but you should ask direct and on-topic questions when seeking dialog (and be prepared to consider replies). You are certainly confusing Nishidani with someone else if you think he might be provoking you for some ulterior motive. Johnuniq (talk) 09:16, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Rex Harrison

Since I'm growing tired of seeing this same article and your same edit popping up on my watchlist, I have opened a discussion on this matter on Talk:Rex Harrison in which you're strongly encouraged to participate. This is what you should have done after you were reverted various times by myself and others. Remember, it's bold, revert, and discuss, not continuously add this content until you get your way and communicate through edit summaries only. Pinkadelica^♣ 21:27, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

I already started a talkpage discussion and mentioned it in an edit summary. It is the one right before the new section you started. In the future, you can avoid these false accusations by assuming good faith. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 21:44, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Sean question about multipile accounts

As there is a many banned users in WP:ARBPIA area this question seem legitimate and I don't think that it meant to offend you.Just answer the truth and get over with it.--Shrike (talk) 08:33, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

No, I think it's part of Sean's battleground behavior. I just asked him to stop spreading slander on AE boards. He'd been warned by an admin to stop his "thrashing" and I thought he should have honored his word to do so, but I guess we see what his honor and word are worth. Thanks for the advise, though. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 10:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

This is my Achilles heel, so I am hardly fit to lecture others, but be aware that personal attacks/vandalism on Sean Hoyland's page will not be tolerated and can result in a block.
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 23:48, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

I was implying that he has his head up his ass. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 23:52, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

May 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Zachary Adam Chesser appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this. Thank you. Aaron Booth (talk) 01:09, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Purple Cloud Temple. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Aaron Booth (talk) 01:11, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

The Chesser edit, I thought, was more neutral my way. But if you insist, fine.

The Purple Cloud Temple, on the other hand, was clearly more neutral my way. Did you read the edit summary? I put something on the talk page just for you. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 04:12, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Hasbara on my talk page

Ha ha ha! Perhaps you think the regurgitation of Israeli hasbara onto someone's talk page productive, but I can assure you I know all the standard Israeli lines. Please don't litter my page with them, I read them all the time in the newspapers, hear them from their spokespeople. And the articles on my user page are VERY informative!! I can see how much you like them, and I also like them very much indeed. Shalom, friend! ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 06:26, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

By the way... Israel shuts liberal radio station in attempt to silence criticism of right
~ Iloveandrea (talk) 06:32, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Israel shut down a pirate radio station. Big deal. They were broadcasting without a license. This is what countries with the rule-of-law do. Just because the station is political doesn't mean it should get to avoid regulations. But you read what you wanted to read out of it. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 07:26, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Also, you removed my comments (which were constructive) from your talk because they were "hasbara," yet you come to my talk spewing your Dawa? Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 07:31, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Finally, in the future you should try to talk less like a poorly-written Anime villian. Ha ha ha! Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 07:34, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Pirate radio? That's not what the source says. Here's more on that ghastly little country: I present the country's treatment of its Holocaust survivors:

"I want the Germans to know where the money they gave Israel went," he said angrily. "I want the Germans to know that Israel took the money we should have received. I want them to answer one question: Where did our money go?"

http://www.haaretz.com/news/survivors-protest-makes-foreign-journalists-gasp-security-vanish-1.226913
http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/israeli-state-funding-of-holocaust-victims-foundation-drops-for-third-year-1.424483
http://www.timesofisrael.com/survivors-stipends-slashed-before-holocaust-remembrance-day/
~ Iloveandrea (talk) 16:48, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Austerity cuts, even in socialist countrys like Israel, happen. This doesn't make it a "ghastly little country." Luckily, you will continue being supplied with free ammunition because your sources and other forms of media in Israel are not state-run (unlike almost all other Middle East media, thank Allah for Facebook). Isn't it ironic that the world's only Jewish-run media is the prime source of truthful criticism of the Jewish State? Mazaltov! I don't know what that word means, but Mazaltov to you. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 01:03, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh, beyond grotesque. Really disgusting. Trying to justify slashing hardship payments to Holocaust survivors as 'austerity measures'? I notice you didn't even attempt to discuss the theft of the German money, long before the financial crisis (that article is from 2007). "I want the Germans to know where the money they gave Israel went," he said angrily. "I want the Germans to know that Israel took the money we should have received. I want them to answer one question: Where did our money go?" There really just is no limit for your sort, is there? Stalinists could never hope to equal your level of mindless state-worship. And you know exactly what Mazaltov it means, hasbara Luke!! Why allude to being Christian? I mean, all Israhell has left these days is an ever-diminishing ethnic core of half-fruitcake, half-mountebank devotees. Even renowned Leftists have given the game up of hating on Israhell: It's become too easy.

Israel is not a socialist country, but has a normal Western European mixed economy.

~ Iloveandrea (talk) 01:22, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Every economy is mixed, but we can describe them as more free (Singapore) or more planned (Israel). Ironically, both of these countries are surrounded by barbarians, but bygones. Israel takes care of old people. The Holocaust survivors get extra. The government, in an act of corruption, didn't give them all the extra they should have got. The free media caught this corruption and publicized it. They were allowed, protected by police, to shame the government publicly.

Now let's talk about the Iranian veterans of the Iran-Iraq war. The gas Iraq used on Iranian soldiers left many with live-long disabilities. Does Iran take care of them? Who the fuck knows? That country is locked up like a flat cracker's snatch.

I am not a hasbara warrior. I don't think Israel is perfect. But you have pointed out, numerous times, why Israel is the solution for the Middle East. It has free speech, a free judiciary, and an evolving society. Compare that to the democracy quagmire of Egypt, Syria, Bahrain, etc. Face it, you wouldn't be able to blow your mouth off about this and that if you lived in one of those countries. You live in the West, and speak like a free man, about how you hate the West. Great! You are part of our great political traditions of speaking truth to power! Maybe, since you love Palestinians and don't just hate Israel, you can go to the Middle East and help political action take root. Point out all the corruption you see, so that you can save them.

I have never tried to present myself as a Christian. I have never tried to present Israel as perfect. I'm against the settlement activity in the West Bank (which I'd never call Judea/Sumeriah) but don't pretend to have the solution to problems in the area. But just because Israel is doing bad things in the West Bank, doesn't change the fact that Arab Israelis and everyone else in the regular part of that country have a better life than anyone else in that region.

The WB Palestinians are still better off there than in Hamas-wrecked Gaza or in the refugee camps of Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, or Egypt. So we should be careful calling Israel the enemy of the Palestinian. There are a great many Arab and Muslim forces that are exploiting the Palestinians for their own agenda. Iran is a great example, so is Jordan. If you really knew anything about the atrocities ongoing in Muhammad's old stomping grounds, you'd forget about these trivial news stories. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 04:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Sean Hoyland

Stop stalking me. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 23:34, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your comments, which, though I may not agree with all of them, are always intelligent, and sometimes just make me laugh out loud. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:21, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I feel like the Ron Paul of Wikipedia. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 00:52, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I was unaware that Ron Paul was an exponent of the Haiku or an admirer of Stanley Ho, but hey, keep those comments coming.Ankh.Morpork 10:26, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I was thinking how people are always saying, "I don't agree with everything Ron Paul says, but I like..." I think that's what happens when a person speaks the truth, not everyone's gonna like everything they hear. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 12:48, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Spermaceti!!

Luke 19 Verse 27: Know that I love you, favourite sparring partner! I feel that you and I, in another set of circumstances, would have been the very closest of friends; as old men, we would have rocked back and forth gently on the porch together, waxing nostalgic over the joys and experiences we'd shared together over the decades. It is a real shame this Wikiwarfare appears to have separated us so irreconcilably, but I nonetheless thank you for the thoughtful spermaceti.

Do you like Polish girls, Luke 19 Verse 27? I do, because they are the perfect combination of adorable and hot. Polskie dziewczyny są najlepsze, więc uczę się polszczyznę. I've got 25 random Polish hotties on Facebook now. Plus Polki are smart, and I enjoy them putting me in my place with their superior knowledge of Polish history. The latter is a modern male's respect for the female, not some psychological defect. All of that said, I boned an Israeli girl when I was in Tel Aviv, and she really was a fantastic shag. Not all Israelis are horrid.

It's very late here: 3:55am. My bed is calling... I've finished reading the thing I was looking at on Kazimierz Kelles-Krauz (I do like to look at things besides Israel-Palestine!), and I'm about ready to drop. NEVER forget how much I love and cherish you. See you in battle soon, I hope.

Your No.1 fan,
~ Iloveandrea (talk) 03:01, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I think we can safetly call detente. Like Rambo and the Taliban, strange fellows can ride horses together, playing a game that involves ripping apart a carcaus that only some of the unfortunates of the world will later play a very real game of hunger for. I very much enjoyed the hasbara thread above, and hope to share more sharpe words on talk pages, though hopefully more contructive collaboration on articles themselves.

I find myself drawn to fat girls, with big breasts. I think it has to do with gravity, but I'm no physicist. I once wanted to bang a physicist, but I only got one D out of the deal. I feel really happy for your Zionist conquest. Hopefully you put your goy seed in her Greater Israel (between the two legs). Then, when he grows up in a free country, after suckin' Mamma Tel Aviverrific Shag's milk-n-honies, he can teach me what "Mazaltov" means. Perhaps he will visit us on our rockin' porch. You should know that I, like all ignant 'shinedrinkers from Creation's #1 country, play the banjo.

In this great mess of a country that we pride ourselves on being so much better than everywhere else, we actively try to fuck things up in other parts of the world, we believe City on a Hill sounds like House on the Hill, and the House on the Hill is full of slaves or servants or whatevers. We also think doctors get best at saving lives when they do it for money. This is true for strippers, so no doubt for other professionals too. A doctor or a stripper, you're putting a kid through college or if you don't have the money you can get the fuck out. I love America.

I can never be an Israeli, even though I think that country is super cool. I also think Singapore is super cool. I've never been to either. They both have universal conscription, and to me the whole idea of an army, I mean actually being in one, sounds kinda gay. Wars are cool and stuff, but that is history. America is done with war, we have evolved to conflicts. So let us, you and me, end our wars and look forward to conflicts to win peace.

But about the bitches. I don't know much about Polish girls. Are they fat? Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 06:52, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Bitches? Fat? No! Slim build; flawless skin; long legs; sprightly glutes; pretty faces with amazing cheekbones; if she's got blue eyes, it'll be the most piercing version imaginable; and yet, amazingly, all too often this already attractive package is rounded off with large, firm breasts. They are a physiological marvel; I advise you to give one a try some day. Our former ambassador to Uzbekistan really enjoyed himself with a Polish girl and her sister. If you don't like it fine, but they'd love to be swept off their feet by a rich American like you. For too many in Poland, it is still barely possible to earn enough to survive, let alone have a life. Get stuck in, chat up a stunner condemned to earning a pittance, then take home your Slavic beauty and bang her all night long. The accent is a marvel to listen to as well, even better than listening to a French girl speaking English. They are well educated too, and so make thoroughly enjoyable company.

I see your unique editing-style of self-contradiction mixed with sidelong viciousness is producing all sorts of unhappiness. My advice? Don't listen to the haters, for hate is just a way of justifying to oneself what one is doing. ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 02:05, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

First off, I am not a rich American. I am poor, but I'm free. I have no need for slavic ball-n-chain, though if one had to have a jailer, they seem like a nice choice.

I'd now like to quote the James-Bond-like Craig Murray, "there is no point in having cocktail-party relationships with a fascist regime." He seems super-cool, thanks for mentioning him. Finally, hate, I have no need for hate. Ask Sean about this. To think bad thoughts is the same as to say bad things. To say bad things is the same as doing bad things. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 06:15, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Sean? Sean Hoyland? Why does he hate you so? You might be on the other, the wrong side of I/P, but that doesn't mean running battles with you can't be fun. You seem to vex and frustrate ally and foe alike; that is to be commended, though perhaps the vexation of your hasbara friends is an artifice.

Why did you chop out that Hills Clinton wank-material from the Netanyahu article? She is 100% milf, no question.

My advice? Continue to pay no heed to the hate. Who the hell thought it would be a good idea to block you? Your lively antics brighten people's editing experiences. I'm off over to AhmoPorker's page later. I posted him the same Israel-and-its-survivors material, but he came back with the usual diversionary hasbara. That is unacceptable. I am burdened with having to refocus his attention. ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 12:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Sean has gone out hunting monsters, and become one himself. He gazed into the abyss, and forgot the abyss stares back. But that's bygones in my mind. Benji's page didn't need two pictures of Hillary on it. When I took a second look at it, maybe I was getting rid of a pic of Benji and Barrack and Benji and Hillary right next to each other. Maybe I was subconsciously fighting this ZOG slander. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 18:27, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

May 2012

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on other people again, as you did at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Revdel, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:20, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

He called me a dum-dum and I said "takes one to know one." That is what you are talking about.

Ok, point taken. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 08:26, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Just to be clear, it was this: you could have responded to me by explaining why you are so not a [redacted] [redacted], but instead removed all doubt.... The dum-dum comment might not be wholly WP:CIVIL but didn't rise to WP:NPA level. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:37, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I can't express how glad I am the thread was closed without further discussion, cause it puts my smack-down in carbonite. It was like he said, "I love you" and I just looked cool like a space rogue and said, "I know." Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 08:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Further, I didn't call nobody, nowhere, a cuntfaced motherfucker or a redactyl-nothing. The content, which I was in dispute within, I was in a content dispute, which was about one editor calling another editor a cuntfaced motherfucker. Neither editor was me. I was originally in no CFed MFed finger-pointing game.

One of the editors, the one called a CFed MF, took the editor who supposedly viewed the cunt face, and the mother fucking, to the AE. I a non-CFed whose M has never been Fed, even by my D (because my D is G or Z) so I just wanted the finger-pointing game to stop between the two parties, regardless of whose face is a cunt, and whose mother has been fucked.

Really, everyone's face can be a cunt, and everyone's mother can be fucked. My cunt face might be scissor-fucking somebody's mother's cunt face right now. It's a crazy world and stranger things have happened.

<sigh>

I long for the carefree days of my youth...

Anyway, this is this CFed MFer's Fin' T Page. So I T's as I see'z. I made allusion (not to be confused with illusion) to Confucious (often confused with Laozi), who said, "never argue with an idiot, passersby won't know which from who." Or maybe it was Muhammad, who, if I may be so bold as to paraphrase the prophet, said, "if one man calls another a motherfucker, surely one of them is so."

You see? I didn't call anybody a CF through MF, though I've often been called a Z. I can do a ZJ, but I aint no Z. And, no, I didn't attack anybody, but called into question the content of the AE thread, that being the dispute between two dum-dums pissed at each others words. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 09:15, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

By the way, the Z's are all different, but I'll never tell. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 09:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

M said if two G's point fingers about effin'

Surely one of those foo's is the one false steppin'

If youzz in the dezzert and your camel done died

Hey bro I got a caddie, hop in my ride

The rims keep spinnin' and my hoes spin winnin'

Truly, I'm like Stanley, Ho and J-hoev grinnin'

Admin's come at my talk page, yo!, they talk this game

"You called him a mother Fer, this is not Germane!"

Well, then make the AE what you want, cause I learned that lesson plain.

And that's how I win arguments 'round hea. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 09:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Blocked

For 12 hours to prevent any further diruption beyond this. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 10:10, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Are you aware that I was disrupting my own talk page? Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 11:03, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

And by disrupting, I mean making it better. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 11:05, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I was making my own talk page better, how dare I? Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 11:06, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

How dare I improve my space? My space. Grrrr, this is my space.

Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 11:08, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Grrr, I'm a bear. I'm a bear on 12 hour hibernation. I have to hibernate for 12 hours because I pooped in my home. How dare I, a bear, poop in my bear-home. Grrr, this bear is mad in his hibernation sleep, dreaming grrr dreams of bear bags not high enough, not high enough camper. Imma eat those sandwiches and the raw meat and all the packaged cookie crap that you thought was safe in your bear bag.

Grrr, Imma bear. I ate my full, and now I sleep, imma, imma... Imma bear

Imma bear Grrr I'm a bear disrupting my own talk page. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 11:12, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Please stick to the task

Hi there, I'm here to make a request that you try and limit your edits to those which actually contribute to writing the encyclopaedia. There are such a large number of unconstructive edits in your contributions that it really begs the question of whether you are here to improve articles, or to have fun. Of course the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive but in my view you've been going too far. In the last 36 hours or so you've appeared to encourageother editors who have made racist comments, left rambling and incomprehensible comments on others' talk pages, filled your own page with completely unnecessary bad language and made postings to AN/I which added nothing constructive whatsoever to the discussion.

As you know I blocked you for one of these, and at the time I was unclear whether this was your normal pattern of editing or an aberration due to sleep deprivation, alcohol, drugs or distress. It seems as though actually this IS your normal pattern and so I'm asking you to stop it. You do make reasonable suggestions and constructive edits to articles sometimes. Please can we have more of these, and less talk page weirdness?

Just so I'm absolutely straight with you, I'm asking you here to change your editing style as an attempt to engage constructively with you. This is the necessary precursor to making a report to WP:AN and that is indeed where I'll go if your patten of contributions doesn't change. I like a joke along with most other folks but yours have gone too far I fear, and lack the style and wit that lets some other editors get away with similar escapades. Sorry if this makes me come across as a humourless adminazi - I couldn't think of any way of delivering this message except as a straight and direct one. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 10:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, I wasn't overly pleased with the block, but the 12 hours, and your advice, is very reasonable. For the time you took, I am in debt to your Good Faith. Hopefully in the future you will enjoy more of my contributions and wit. You are certainly no adminazi. Perhaps an adminkaiser at worst. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 11:03, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

New material

New materials on Ankh.Morpork's talk. Love and peace, Luke 19. ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 00:03, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Natalie Menaged is fucking hot, by the way. I told some Israeli chap they really ought to bring her in to replace Regev. Everyone loves a pretty face, I think even I'd believe hasbara if it emanated from between those beautiful lips. ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 00:07, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh, these friends of mine. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 02:06, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Hey, sorry to trouble you, old bean. I asked Shrike, but I've been met with sullenness: I want to condense down the tl;dr section, Second Prime Ministership or whatever it's called, on Bibi's article. Once I've hacked it down, would you be prepared to give a quick look over and grant a seal of approval? Could save me getting reverted immediately if the other side have said it's OK before I make the replacement—but who knows? Actually, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised: bits you probably don't like I plan on shortening quite drastically.

Know that I love you, Luke 19 Verse 27. Know it in your crotch. ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 02:51, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Powerfully in your crotch. ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 02:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Nothing is more powerful than love, no matter where it comes from. Well, there's a rose, and there's a glove. And the eagle flies, with the dove. If you can't be, with the one you love, honey, love the one your with. I'm with you on this Bibi page. I've been thinking that building pages on newspaper articles, while convenient, is bound to be dated and POV. The stuff Bibi did, with a limit of he said she said about why he did whom. The man has had three wives, one of whom a sky bitty half his age.

So if you'll gonna cut pork fat from Bibi's hamhocks, go for it. You allowed me to turn the page into a No Hillarys Club (we are allowed to have one), so I'll gladly look it over when I'm in a benevolent, perhaps ambivalent mood.

There will be no revert-warring on Bibi's page, only constructive additions or constructive substractions, situation depending, non-sequentially. The talk page, well, I aint makin' promises. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 10:28, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

PS How is it possible that Bibi and Abu Mazen don't love each other. 90% of the worlds population, if they saw the two sitting in opposite ends of a dinner, would notice that they look the same, are eating the same falafoul, sipping the same hot tea even though its fucking hot, smoking the same hookah pipe, and are both arguing with their friend about how they know everything and are gonna make everything right by doing the same thing to each other, not hearing each other from across the cafe.

This is when I tell a waiter to buy a drink "from the gentlemen across the room" for each of them. Their eyes will meet, and history will be made. Amen. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 10:37, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

offensive caption

They are not "young women", they are little girls, and your caption has an offensive connotation. You'd better do something about it quick. Zero^talk 01:47, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Only women wear hijab. Never girls. You, I think, are confused. Relax, AGF, learn something new to add to your already great knowledge of Palestinian culture, and know that the Sun will shine tomorrow.

The shine in this story is a metaphor for love. I am the Sun and you are the Earth. My love makes you warm, doesn't it? If you don't like the caption, my blue-green loveball, then change it. But try to keep the project going with construction, not destruction, and certainly the Earth is great and vast and noble, but it doesn't tell the Sun what to do. Don't throw around geocentric orders in the Sun's house, but thanks for stopping by. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 01:59, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

"young women"!!! underneath a picture of two young girls?? I think you won, for the caption still stands there proudly, subtly directing readers to the lulz. ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 02:25, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Mmm, and imagine dicking Queen Rania. I feel hard like making a vandalism to that effect on her article. BLP or no BLP, readers deserve to be told that Iloveandrea is desperate to ravenously fuck Rania's fanny. ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 02:30, 18 May 2012 (UTC)