User talk:LtPowers: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 07:20, 4 May 2006

Welcome!

Hello, LtPowers, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! ~MDD 46 96 00:48, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Weishampel exchange

Thanks for helping me keep an eye on this thing. I note with some alarm that you are attending my alma mater and hope that it's just coincidence and not indicative of anything... =) Powers 23:49, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Powers, I appreciated the note. If this concomitance means anything I'm sure it is that we make fine Wikipedians, being keepers of the peace and all. Really though, I came across the article from CollegeHumor, and considering some of the college-aged people I know... well, suffice to say that I expected worse. I'm just waiting for the link to be archived on CollegeHumor so that we can nominate it for deletion without interference (unless of course someone could prove to me that it wasn't a joke?). Anyways, thanks! ~MDD 46 96 00:47, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong IP

Sure did, went to history and the editor had entered an IP with one edit and no warnings, so its contagious. I left a message on their page (Phatmonkey, the editor who made the request.) KillerChihuahua^?!? 20:34, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Evils of Atheism

It's about damn time somebody taught atheists their own medicine, and before you ask, I do not generalize, I think there's a cultural distinction between atheism and nonbelievers. Atheists tend to be enraged over religion of any kind, and spend a lot of time elevating Darwin and bemoaning the Crusades. Nonbelievers in general - say, someone who's raised a Christian, believes the Bible is an allegory, and only attends church for a funeral or perhaps at Christmastime - tend to adopt a "Whatever gets you through the night" philosophy and be quiet on matters of faith. It's sort of like the difference between a devout vegetarian and someone who hates the taste of meat. Atheists are proud of their hate. It is something that they love devoutly and use it to hate christians. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GreekWarrior (talk • contribs) .

Drakeguy-I think you're missing the point of why so many people have become atheists and non-believers. I personally get turned off organized religion when I have seen it so consistently misused. It's been used to justify the attacks on innocent children(Beslan), or by others to attack minority groups for political gain (gays in the US) with little evidence to back up ANY of the accusations, and still by others to initiate ethnic cleansing and civil war (Bosnia and Iraq).

And what about Darwin? Darwin, when he made the theory, was not out to "get" Christianity and the story of Genesis. He simply was confronted with evidence that suggested an interesting pattern in the history of life on earth. You can fume all you want, but the simple fact of the matter is that you can now trace the evolution of humanity throughout DNA extracted from the bones of our ancestors. And not just our species, but many others as well. Just this past week they found a fossil that provides us with conclusive evidence of a link between fish and amphibians when scientists found a half-fish/half-amphibian in the Canadian Arctic on Baffin Island. It was until recently, a missing link creationists seized upon to attack evolution's "incomplete" record.

Finally, let's get to this issue of hate and who's oppressing whom more. I can find numerous examples of religion attacking science and other "undesirables"(Copernicus for suggesting the earth was round-got jailed, the Spanish Inquisition, the Scopes Monkey Trial(Scopes was on trial for teaching evolution, a banned subject in the state of Tennessee), the numerous attacks upon evolution since Darwin proposed it(including today's debate about putting intelligent design in schools that was forced upon the nation by a very reactive Pennsylvania school board), and religious conservatives attacking scientists' character after producing studies showing no significant difference being raised by gay parents than straight parents (mentally and physically). I don't know about atheists hating religion, as my roommate is atheist and really could not care less, but it would appear historically that religion, not science, has been the aggressor when beliefs were called into question by scientific evidence. The only conflict I can find that pitted science in any fashion(or the state in general) against religion was the French Revolution, during which the Catholic Church, due to its elitist economic goals in France, found itself temporarily banned.

Finally I'd like to say that I do not hate religion. I was baptized in the Lutheran Church and was raised in a fairly Christian household. My issue with your "atheists hate believers" article here is that you do not mention at all, just how many times the believers oppress, hate, or kill the atheists. Or the "infidel" believers of other religions or beliefs for that manner. Take the Beslan school hostage crisis, the harsh reaction to the "muslim takeover" of American ports, the current Shia-Sunni bloodbath in Iraq, Al-Queda declaring war on the "infidel crusaders" worldwide, the Taliban destroying "infidel" Buddhist statues in Afghanistan while praising god, the French Muslim riots, or the Nazis(a religious cult movement according to the History Channel) killing the Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, and Poles.

Much like Dan Brown has said, it's amazing how the body count always tends to go higher when there are more "true believers". Parts of organized religion have always been involved in terrible acts against others, suppresses rival groups, and rewrites history to its liking. Thus Mary Magdalene went from being Jesus' chief disciple to being a prostitute, and her Gospel was never included in the Holy Bible(yes, she wrote one-check out the Gnostic Gospels). And yes, organized religion does great things many times for the less fortunate, but like I said, all it takes are a few bad apples to ruin the reputation of everyone involved. Until organized religion is actually used to help people, not gain power for religious leaders, and not used to attack others, I will remain fairly suspicious of certain members of it. But there is one notable exception I have found going through the history books: Buddhism. I give Buddhism top marks for peacefulness as there has never been a holy war or oppression of a people by another because of it. In fact, I cannot even find a single instance of Buddhism even going after science or a scientific theory. Buddhism transcends scientific theory, and that's a beautiful and rare thing in this world.

Religion and atheism can coexist, but it takes both sides to hold the peace. The same goes for science and religion. My roommate respects the views of religious conservatives...my question is why you find it necessary to misrepresent the views of many atheists? It is a free country after all-my roommate has never expressed hate for you, and many others like him have not. Trust me, they're not out to get you and the 80 other percent of North Americans who happen to be Christian. Drakeguy 06:14, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hilary Duff Merge

Why do you think the two Hilary Duff pages should be merged? Tcatron565

Notable People standard

How notable does a person have to be to qualify to be in Wikipedia? --Masssiveego 00:40, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV Check on MADtv Article

I Fixed the MADtv article on the second paragraph. all i did was toshow the history of MADtv i didn't mean to say about the favor over seasons. when i did it the rules popped out of my head so can you please takre out the POV check ~~Metlover21 5:56 3, Febuary 2006 (UTC)

Cameltoe

The old link didn't work. I guess snopes didn't like linking to their site. So, that's why I changed it. If you have an image with higher resolution, feel free to change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.163.31 (talk • contribs)

Visit my Wikicity

If you know what wikicities is then i invite you to see my Wikicity The in living color guide it has facts and info on the show if you would like to visit go to the link on the bottom if you would like to leave a comment then go to discussion thank you [1] Metlover21 23:28, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spycraft Linkification

Thanks for adding the link to the Star Wars rpg. I was working on that article while at work last night, so some things were missed ;) Cybogoblin 02:37, 28 February 2006 (UTC) (PS. Is this the same Lt Powers as is on the AEG Forums?)[reply]

Categories for deletion

Why did you only list Category:People who worked with Ralph Bakshi for deletion, and not Category:People who worked with David Lynch? How is one superior to the other? If neither of which is notable, why not try to get both of them deleted? (Ibaranoff24 03:30, 7 March 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Daystar (hacker culture)

Your comment on removing the prod was "it's been around for ages." Can you provide a reference? A search of daystar slang on Google only turns up Wiktionary. A search of daystar hacker only turns up Wikipedia mirrors as relevant hits. Daystar is also a company so it could be overwhelmed by that, but I couldn't find a reference. I'll agree the term "day star" has been used for quite a long time, but I see no evidence that it's part of hacker culture. Day star, in common usage, is a reference to Venus (also called the morning star and evening star). Thanks. -- JLaTondre 13:32, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reference from 2000: [2] Another reference from 2000: [3] From 1999: [4]

I can't find any older references, but its usage in the above links seems to indicate it was at least recognizable if not in widespread use by the year 2000. "Evil DayStar" and "The rumors of the Daystar are true!" appear to be the most common constructions. Powers 14:27, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, only 329 Google hits for "evil Daystar" and 316 for "rumors of the Daystar are true" (though that phrase could easily vary in wording). Not enough to warrant the creation of an article in my opinion, but since it already exists, enough that I won't argue for its deletion. Thanks for your time... -- JLaTondre 17:30, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I don't necessarily disagree; I primarily wanted to make sure it got an AfD discussion before being deleted. =) Powers 18:45, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:64.18.36.2

I was just trying to get people's attention on User talk:64.18.36.2 since s/he is posting some particularly nasty vandalism with racist allegations that read like actual facts. Trying to avoid another ridiculous John Seigenthaler Sr. Wikipedia biography controversy. —Wknight94 (talk) 22:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Bunyan

I thought someone might have some doubts about it. I named Paul Bunyan (lumberjack) because he was most famous for being the mythical lumberjack, of course. Of course, your solution might have been more pratical for the fix of one redirect, but what if those redirects do get filled? The disambiguation page would have been created eventually. You may have not noticed yet, but I did just add some blue links into the disambiguation page. They are Paul Bunyan Trophy and Paul Bunyan's Axe. And I think it safe to assume anything named Paul Bunyan will probably be named after the lumberjack anyways. Well, I'll see if I get anymore complaints and if I do, I'll probably revert it to the previous versions. Moe ε 03:29, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Cross Arena

I thought that picture was okay because it had the logo on that part of the building. But yeah it probably isn't good because its more than just the logo. Can it be a zoomed in picture of that do you think? I couldn't find a picture of the logo by itself.

re: DRV for myg0t

Several days ago, you recommended undeleting the article for myg0t. In your comment, you said that you believed the second deletion nomination had been closed in error and that consensus had not been reached. Since your comment, I discovered that the second AFD discussion in question had been vandalized by an anon user between the closure of the discussion and the start of the deletion review. The vandalism obscured several valid comments. Could I ask you to return to the DRV discussion, review the unvandalized version of the AFD discussion and affirm whether or not you still believe the discussion was improperly closed? Thanks. Rossami (talk) 19:16, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Murdock

Can I get an edit on the talk page of the Mike Murdock article about why you loathe Mike Murdock? --Masssiveego 18:50, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou

Thankyou for your very kind and courteous comment on the DRV page for The Game. Didn't you think I waffled a bit, though? --David.Mestel 06:09, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for your kind reply. I'm thinking of joining the AMA or the Advocates' Cabal. --David.Mestel 14:46, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your message. I will definantly check these features out and start using them :) Thanks. Danlev 04:12, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

On behalf of the CVU, thank you for your disambiguation of Phasing.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e9/Counter_Vandalism_Unit.png

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mhs5392 (talk • contribs) .

"Rochester Canal"

Thanks for fixing that. I know nothing about the Rochester area and was only going by the description on the source page, which captioned the image with, "Red-roofed barges follow the line of the Rochester Canal, with the Rochester Skyline in the background." howch e ng {chat} 00:04, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Naturism cleanup - Thanks

Thanks for cleaning up the "Christian Naturism" wiki.

As you can probably tell, I am still new to all of this and so I was having trouble figuring out how to properly format the quotations area.

I have a ton more to add, including Biblical verses used to support Christian Naturism.

I am dabating wheter they should be on the same page or on another page and if so wht it should be called.

Thanks,

Nathan Powers

Natman55 17:40, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Craig Ferguson

Thanks for the backup at the Ferguson article—also want to note that when I said "The" is the only term appropriate, I also added other necessary terms, I know "the" isn't the only one. But thanks for the assistance!. — CRAZY`(IN)`SANE 19:15, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spring holiday

I accept your apology, as "User:142.176.56.175" is most definitely not me, though yes I do admit it seems suspicious, what can I do? Also, I wish you would review User:Thumbelina's edits and see that they are not offering any type of NPOV in comparison to the original state of the page, they are simply ignoring the cited facts that are agreed apon as valid by me and other users who have visited Spring holiday's talk page. I can assure you that the version prior to Thumbelina's rude intrusion is as NPOV as possible, and I'm sure you won't find any POV, and every one of my claims has extensive in-text citations. Thumbelina also removed an agreed apon consensus between myself and User:AYArktos, which holds that there should be extensive assurance that these terms are only used in North America. Also, the user added non-Christian holidays such as "Hanukkah", which is completely original research as there is no attempt to validate his claims. — CRAZY`(IN)`SANE 23:40, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me what you think of this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rationales to impeach George W. Bush (3rd nomination).
You can leave your message on this talk page here.

@@ Line 128: / Line 128: @@
 ==Spring holiday==
 I accept your apology, as "User:142.176.56.175" is most definitely not me, though yes I do admit it seems suspicious, what can I do? Also, I wish you would review User:Thumbelina's edits and see that they are not offering any type of NPOV in comparison to the original state of the page, they are simply ignoring the cited facts that are agreed apon as valid by me and other users who have visited Spring holiday's talk page. I can assure you that the version prior to Thumbelina's rude intrusion is as NPOV as possible, and I'm sure you won't find any POV, and every one of my claims has '''extensive''' in-text citations. Thumbelina also removed an agreed apon consensus between myself and User:AYArktos, which holds that there should be extensive assurance that these terms are only used in North America. Also, the user added non-Christian holidays such as "Hanukkah", which is completely original research as there is no attempt to validate his claims. &mdash; <small>[[user:CrazyInSane|CRAZY]]</small>`[[user talk:CrazyInSane|(<small>IN</small>)]]`<small>[[Special:Contributions/CrazyInSane|SANE]]</small> 23:40, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
+---------------
+*Please tell me what you think of this: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rationales to impeach George W. Bush (3rd nomination)]].
+*You can leave your message on this talk page here.
+---------------