User talk:Kathovo

If you leave a new message on this page, I will reply on this page unless you ask me to reply elsewhere.

Reverting on article Jesus

I have started a talk at Talk:Jesus#Recent Reverting of template. for the recent reverting.Thanks -- Ibrahim ebi (talk) 19:10, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Isa (name)

Hi :) I'm wondering why don't you discuss your bold edits first instead of repeatingly trying to remove a well-cited sentence from EQ's paragraph? I reverted your edit per WP:NOCONSENSUS, as that policy explains that we must retain "the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit". Wiqi⁽⁵⁵⁾ 11:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Semitic 1st AD.svg

That that the borders have to be more or less approximate is clear. I just doubt that Amharic can be dated so far back. It's not only a modern language; ancient Amhara region is said to have been conquered in the 9th century AD and Amharic language only became the royal language in 13th century AD, spread mainly in the 14th century with a lot of conquests under Gäbrä Mäsqäl ʿAmdä-Ṣiyon. One might rather consider to separate (the predecessor of) Modern South Arabian, which is presumably close to Ge'ez, and Old South Arabian, which is presumably more distinct from Ge'ez. Anyway might be termed South Arabian instead of Southern Arabic, to avoid confusion... --Aferghes (talk) 00:11, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your remarks. I had a very vague idea of South Arabian and Ethiopic, could you give me more details on where were they distributed at the turn of the 1st millennium. I would appreciate it if you can provide references.--Rafy talk 13:19, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

The most recent publication on Semitic Languages including South Semitic I know is Stefan Weninger (ed.), The Semitic Languages An International Handbook, De Gruyter 2011, ISBN 978-3-11-018613-0.

On the question that Modern South Arabian might be closer to Ethiosemitic than Epgraphic (or Old) South Arabian cf. The Semitic Languages (2011), p. 1116: "This would leave MSA and ES as a sort of ‘core’ South-Semitic. And indeed, as Müller (1964) has already argued, these two groups share many features:".

On the division North Ethio-Semitic (Geez) vs. South Ethio-Semitic (Prdecessor of Amharic) cf. also doubts in: Rainer Voigt, North vs. South Ethiopian Semitic. I.: S. Ege et al. (eds.). Proceedings of the 16th International, 2009 in: Conference of Ethiopian Studies, vol. IV (Trondheim: NTNU-tryck), 1375-1387, online http://portal.svt.ntnu.no/sites/ices16/Proceedings/Forms/AllItems.aspx .

The Ethiosemtic Languagages were probably the Northern Part, i.e. the Geez part. My assumption that the Southern regions are probably later is based on historic sources that these areas were only much later conquered; cf. e.g. Taddese Tamrat Church and State in Ethiopia 1270-1527, p. 35 (Amhara in 9th century), p. 119ff. (further territorial expansion from 1270)

--Aferghes (talk) 15:56, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

There is a map on Ethiosemitic Languages (p. 1123) and on MSA (p. 1078) in Stefan Weninger (ed.), The Semitic Languages (2011), but the maps are of course of today (and not of 1st century AD). Generally MSA is east between today Yemen and Oman, and on the island of Soqotra.

--Aferghes (talk) 16:42, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the long delay. I have done the following:

• Renamed Southern Arabic to Old South Arabian.
• Removed Amharic.
• Split MSA and merged it with Ge'ez under the name South Semitic.

Is there any evidence that suggests that MSA predates Ge'ez and other Ethiopic Semitic languages or was a migration the other way around?

P.S. I have copied this discussion to the image's talk page. I think it is best we continue further discussions over there.--Rafy talk 16:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Assyrian International News Agency

Hi, Rafy. How are you ? Is this a reliable source ? I'm interested in Kurdish ethnocentric assimilation propaganda. Takabeg (talk) 23:18, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, AINA is definitely a partisan website and must be used with caution. I wouldn't use it as a main reference in any controversial issues myself but the website has its weight among many Assyrian nationalists, so a brief attributed mention can be useful to convey the POV of many Assyrians.--Rafy talk 15:58, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

An article for your interest

Read this article and request the remainder of it from the author. Enjoy! P.S., try not to get influenced so much by scholars who say the identity of our people is a relatively recent contraption, I've read many of your recent comments and it seems that you're slowly falling on the side that we are not what name says we are. Be strong, even when you find yourself in the minority at times my friend. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1721218 130.17.85.239 (talk) 19:40, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the link, I will take a look at it. I don't think there are warring sides for me to pick one. --Kathovo talk 21:42, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Your editing

You wrote: "I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Ivan Dias, because it didn’t appear constructive to me."

Constructive towards what? Please specify! I simply documented a fact about the media coverage on Cardinal Dias without commenting it in any biased way and thereby contributed to the construction of an informed resource on the subject. It is not up to you to decide for all the rest of the Wikipedia users which facts they might find helpful in their future research. If you doubt the stated facts, you can add alternative sources or start a discussion. So please undo your edit and restore my contribution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82a940v (talk • contribs) 12:17, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Could you please elaborate what encyclopaedic value does The Young Turks has to add to Wikipedia articles?--Kathovo talk 14:15, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

More facts that Katho is blindly editing to keep CIA control over stuff she knows nothing of. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.85.223.10 (talk) 17:56, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Tychonic Model

It seems you do not understand why I removed the line and you are deleting other reliable references I have added to the article. I have had astronomy students incorrectly reference this article confusing the line to refer to special relativity and not a basic mathematical frame of reference transformation. The line appeared to be added by someone who supports modern geocentrism, which is not taken seriously in modern astronomy and reduced the strength of stellar aberration, which I added a reference for. ~ 70.177.229.154 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.177.229.154 (talk) 13:47, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I have zero knowledge in astronomy but I know that blogs are not a WP:RELIABLE SOURCE.--Kathovo talk 13:54, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Phil Plait is a professional astronomer and published popular science author. His Bad Astronomy blog was not self-published but published on the website of a science magazine, Discover Magazine. According toWP:RELIABLE SOURCE, this would place it under a news organization source. His article explains the removed line should be rewritten to avoid confusion with special relativity or stating Einstein supported a geocentric Universe. The reference for stellar abberation is from a online astronomy textbook written by Courtney Seligman, who is a former Professor of Astronomy at Long Beach City College. Stellar abberation is also described at Ron Nave's Hyperphysics website (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/star.html#c2), a web-based physics textbook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.177.229.154 (talk) 19:18, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Documentary about the Aramaeans

Hi there, on Youtube is an interesting documentary about the Arameans. Perhaps you are interested in it, but it is very long. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymTsFU0n3U4--Aram342 (talk) 23:24, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the link, I have seen The Hidden Pearl some time ago.--Kathovo talk 16:14, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

David Coleman

Please stop editing my changes to Mr. Coleman's page. The page is riddled with inaccuracies, not the least of which is that he is NOT an educational consultant. Please ask before you undertake any further changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.191.211.55 (talk) 17:46, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I have reverted your edits because you removed referenced sections which might be considered vandalism. Please provide an edit summary and proper sources in your future contributions.--Kathovo talk 17:53, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

"Reference sections that might be considered vandalism?" No clue what you are talking about. All I did was update his page with his actual profile. Hold your horses there, chief.

Removal of refs is vandalism.--Kathovo talk 17:57, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

From the wiki page on Wikipedia Vandalism: "Even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism. Edit warring over content is not vandalism. Careful consideration may be required to differentiate between edits that are beneficial, detrimental but well-intentioned, and vandalizing. Mislabelling good-faith edits as vandalism can be considered harmful." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.191.211.55 (talk) 18:00, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I've been reverting hundreds of suspected edits to Wikipedia over the past hour, how would I know that your removal of refs is done in good faith? Have you tried to use the article's talk page or the edit summary field to clarify your position?--Kathovo talk 18:09, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Kalamazoo College

Hi Kathovo, You recently called my edit to the Kalamazoo College page "unconstructive". I disagree. As a member of the Kalamazoo College branding and marketing team, it is very important to us that the Kalamazoo College logo is represented accurately as an orange block letter K. The seal is not to the same as the logo, and is reserved for presidential documents. Please let us make the change to the logo. Carolyn Zinn Kalamazoo College Information Services — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarolynZinn (talk • contribs) 20:55, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Wikipedia doesn't support external media. You can re-upload the new logo over the existing image yourself.--Kathovo talk 21:20, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

change to what objects can be seen from space correct

Hello, I beleive you change you removed from the wikipedia page i changed was incorrect. http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_can_be_seen_on_earth_from_space that URL clearly states that my answer is true and accurate. I beleive this is very constructive details to the page i had edited. please return the information.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.180.181.173 (talk • contribs) 16:25, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Please try to post this in the article's talk page, I'm sure other knowledgeable editors can verify this claim better than me.--Kathovo talk 16:03, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

incorrect change

Career since the failed nomination

On August 24, 2002 Bonnie Campbell was both charged and convicted of public intoxication for an incident in Davenport, IA.[7] As of December 16, 2012 she has still not paid the $250 fine.[8]

The above information is not correct or accurate. This case refers to person with the same name as Bonnie Campbell but that person's birthday is 6/12/1963, where as the birthday for Bonnie Campbell for which this Wikipedia page focuses on has a birthday of 4/9/1948. These are two different people.

I have tried deleting the information, but it keeps getting reposted.

Please see https://www.iowacourts.state.ia.us/ESAWebApp/TIndexFrm. 173.18.202.207 (talk) 19:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem I won't revert again. Just don't forget to write an edit summary next time. Cheers.--Kathovo talk 15:58, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

User talk:166.137.208.24

Hi, just came online to find a spanking regarding, of all things, a bear claw pastry.

I don't know if there is an elegant solution but this ip is part of a shared AT&T 4G data block so the user can change literally minute by minute.

Oh well, good luck correcting the dweeb who dislikes bear claw pastries.

Respects,

Someone who's never eaten, much less edited a bear claw. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.137.208.30 (talk) 19:58, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

hi

Probably for you the content I've changed is not positive, but I live in Portugal and yes, its true what I wrote, people need to know, about this corrupt bastards, in their wikipedias they are all clean and perfect, but they steal, they don't pay taxes, they gives jobs to each others, like mr Passos Coelho that received 120M€ and declared 0€ of taxes, I don't see any of that on his page... was wikipedia made to inform or just this a lame database with no real evidence? Miguel Relvas got a graduates degree on a Saturday with equivalencies at all classes, Passos Coelho left University at 30 something and after that he got automatically promoted to CEO at a Miguel Relvas company that went bankrupt, after this failure, his friend Miguel Relves gives him another job again has CEO. So don't come telling me about positive comments, because there is nothing positive about this shit. We are tired of this fucking mob, people need to know whats going on.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.244.78.34 (talk • contribs) 17:38, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Imagine if everybody with a cause writes something similar in other articles, we wouldn't call Wikipedia an encyclopaedia would we?--Kathovo talk 15:58, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Regarding Adnan Aroor article

Hi

I did leave an explanation on why I removed that part of the article as it is misleading and I quote my reason:

QUOTE:[The comment was taken out of context from the Economist article. Whomever picked that specific line attempted to portray that most, if not all Syrian Sunnis share Al-Aroors opinion; which is untrue to say the least. Not all Syrian Sunni Muslims share Aroors views and neither does the Economist article suggest such thing, The article was merely suggesting that Aroor's fanbase/followers is growing, mainly amongst Syrian Sunnis. ]

Are you the person who added this part to the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jumada (talk • contribs) 16:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not the one who added it but it is supported by the source and removing a referenced section just because you don't agree with it is considered vandalism.--Kathovo talk 16:55, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with it, the sentence was TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT. Please dont put words in my mouth. Read my response and reply to it accordingly. Its like saying you can lie or distort the truth as long as you source it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jumada (talk • contribs) 17:04, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: Disruptive editing

Since you have added a similar note, you may have a look here! In addition you are welcome to join/contribute at WikiProject India.

Namaste, Kathovo. You have got at least one new message at the Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics. Please continue the discussion there!
Message added by Tito Dutta (contact) 17:43, 31 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time.

You reverted me?

Why? Legoktm (talk) 20:50, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, looked like Rererererererererere was writing gibberish. Didtn't realise you got reverted as well.--Kathovo talk 20:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

No worries :) Legoktm (talk) 15:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

VSCO

i was trying to add the official facebook page to the list of related links — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.182.205.88 (talk) 11:02, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Qaradawi edit explained in edit summary

Hi I actually did explain the edit in my edit summary if you review. So it is puzzling why you undid the revision without reviewing the content or the edit summary? But I can certainly elaborate. Just because a large chunk is removed, does not call for its' restoration as it fails to comply with WP:RS and WP:BLP. The addition of the material stems from an anonymous edit on February 18th, which relies on primary sources to support a POV. Hence the removal and restoration back to the last reliably sourced version. Best regards, Minaret13 (talk) 21:38, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Those parts seemed referenced by the Telegraph. Anyway I won't revert you since you apparently know what you're doing.--Kathovo talk 21:50, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Actually I did keep the Telegraph content. However, the section added actually used is onislam.net, which is not a reliable source. But I have kept the Telegraph sourced content, though I had to restore the wording and content back to the NPOV version before the anon edit. Hence the confusion. I haven't changed anything as such. Just restored to reflect as per sources. Thanks for your vote of confidence. Appreciated. Best regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minaret13 (talk • contribs) 22:00, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Maurice Tempelsman

Please, why did you do that? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maurice_Tempelsman&diff=548525790&oldid=548524976 --80.136.45.216 (talk) 18:43, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for that, I restored it for you.--Kathovo talk 18:46, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Vielen Dank! ;-) --80.136.45.216 (talk) 18:50, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

List of Winx Club Episode

The Source isnt official so stop the edit war! thanks Malibu1236 (talk) 10:57, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

United Macedonia

Please do not revert the user again. Let's wait until he's blocked. O.Koslowski (talk) 17:37, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll just ignore it then.--Kathovo talk 17:38, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Report User

The group of vandals turns Wikipedia into the battleground of WWII, claiming that Hitler was in fact a heterosexual Communist and betrayed the Nazi Germany. As true Nazi LGBT they correct Hitler's left and heterosexual errors to win WWII on behalf of Nazi Germany in English Wikipedia. The same vandal, mentioned by Solarra, and his group vandalized numerous times recognizing themselves the editors of English Wikipedia on behalf of non-existing Nazi Germany (WP:Fringe) nowadays. They distribute libels, provide the US Department of Homeland Security with false information and tell about an existing now organization Kazarla without any links to Nazis in such a way. " 'Kazarla' - it is a neologism (that is not used in Nazi Germany) ... Nazi Germany gave a shit for Asians. - Altenmann >t 02:20, 4 April 2013 (UTC) In fact they distribute incorrect information about the Japanese ally in WWII as well.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.66.202.70 (talk • contribs) 19:44, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Which users did you mean by that? You have to be more specific if you want to report vandalism.--Kathovo talk 17:51, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

A disagreeable position is not vandalism

If you have a specific issue raise it with me on my talk page.

Ever heard of RK Hendrick? I'll bet that you have. Your book, even though you twisted the title, is plagiarism. Here is his book. Viewing this as offensive, has nothing to do with the TRUTH.

http://www.amazon.com/Avoid-Getting-Screwed-When-Volume/dp/0615327478/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1365100945&sr=8-2&keywords=how+to+get+laid+without+getting+screwed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.25.205.171 (talk) 18:48, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Reproductive system, wrong revert

See here. Flyer22 (talk) 19:10, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Oops sorry for that, I think I clicked the revert button one second too late on Huggle.--Kathovo talk 19:13, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I knew that it wasn't on purpose; I just wanted to let you know about it, so that it'll help you avoid that type of accident in the future. Even if such an accident happens again, what I mean is that it's sometimes good to check back on a revert. I sometimes make such mistakes when using WP:Rollback. Flyer22 (talk) 19:30, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for being a vandal fighter.--I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 21:30, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the flower :).--Kathovo talk 09:35, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Hutaree

The section I deleted:

"Many videos posted on the Hutaree's website support several right-wing organizations, politicians, and news commentators. A former fiancee of Hutaree leader David Stone, has claimed that he was a "Ron Paul fanatic."[8]"

This section is unnecessary and attempts to correlate the actions of David Stone with the beliefs of Ron Paul. There simply is no equivalency, and any such suggestion is merely conjecture or opinion. The Daily KOS, which is the source cited, is a well known left-wing publication which has views that are diametrically opposed to the parties in question. The piece that is used as a citation is slanderous, biased, contains derogatory terms such as "teabaggers," and simply does not measure up to the metric of journalistic integrity or quality to merit citation. The biased and unprofessional nature of the article in question should automatically exclude it from mention.

Hitler was a fan of Beethoven, does that bear mention within the context of his political beliefs? No. Similarly, Ron Paul never advocated violent revolt in any of his speeches or writings. Hence it is a huge leap of logic to associate the two. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.249.209.9 (talk) 13:16, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Please write an edit summary next time you decide to remove a paragraph. Drive-by blanking can be easily confused for vandalism.--Kathovo talk 17:09, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Friendly reminder

Just a note to remind you that the CSD guidelines indicate that you should give an article author a reasonable amount of time to develop their article before tagging it for speedy deletion. Tagging as G7 after two minutes is certainly too fast. If you're patrolling from the front of the queue, try patrolling from the back instead to avoid this problem. Regards Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 17:49, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I only tagged it after it was blanked by the author.--Kathovo talk 17:50, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Reverting on article Political ideologies in the united states

Check the links for information on the Pew Research tables. They're all broken. I left a note on the talk page before doing anything. The graphs are inconsistent with the tables as well. The whole page needs some cleaning.

I'll take your advice on using an edit note next time. But the Pew-sourced information is all without references, and should be removed.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rymmen (talk • contribs) 04:08, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi, blanking of seemingly referenced content will always show as vandalism to patrollers, best way to communicate with them is to leave an edit summary. In case of dead links, it is better to use this template first and raise the issue in the article's talk page, give some time to other users to look for other references.--Kathovo talk 02:21, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

K, should I just put dead link everywhere that Pew tables are referenced? The graphs are also inconsistent with the tables. The text is also inconsistent with the tables. I can't find a way to get a straight story out of it, and there are no references to be found. The appropriate action seems to be cleaning.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rymmen (talk • contribs)

I know it might be very tedious but placing template is the recommended practice. If you really have to remove a big chunk don't forget to fill the edit summary.--Kathovo talk 02:38, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Change

Hey, sorry, I was showing my wife how easy it is to vandalize a wikipedia page, and I forgot to delete it. I am very sorry, we were discussing whether a Wiki page would be ideal for her project. 98.247.94.20 (talk) 18:53, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Suck my dick

File:Penis.png	Dick snot award
	eat my eye you bitch Anarcho-syndikalist101 (talk) 19:30, 7 April 2013 (UTC)