Jump to content

User talk:Doug Weller

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lionhead99 (talk | contribs) at 10:39, 29 June 2013 (→‎Talkback). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User:Doug Weller
User:Doug Weller
User talk:Doug Weller
User talk:Doug Weller
User:Doug Weller/Workshop
User:Doug Weller/Workshop
Special:Prefixindex/User:Doug Weller
Special:Prefixindex/User:Doug Weller
User:Doug Weller/Userboxes
User:Doug Weller/Userboxes
Special:Contributions/Doug Weller
Special:Contributions/Doug Weller
Special:Emailuser/Doug Weller
Special:Emailuser/Doug Weller
home
Talk Page
Workshop
Site Map
Userboxes
Edits
Email

Notice Coming here to ask why I reverted your edit? Read this page first...

Please leave me new messages at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new section at the bottom. I usually notice messages soon. I attempt to keep conversations in one location, as I find it easier to follow them that way when they are archived. If you open a new conversation here, I will respond to you here. Please watchlist this page or check back for my reply. If I have already left a message at your talk page, unless I've requested follow-up here or it is a standard template message, I am watching it. If you leave your reply here, I may respond at your talk page if it seems better for context. If you aren't sure if I'm watching your page, or I'm slow to reply, feel free to approach me here.

Welcome to my talk page! I am an administrator here on Wikipedia. That means I am here to help. It does not mean that I have any special status or something, it just means that I get to push a few extra buttons to help maintain this encyclopedia.

If you need help with something, feel free to ask. Click here to start a new topic.
If I have not made any edits in a while, (check) you may get a faster response by posting your request in a more centralized place.



You can email me from this link but in the interests of Wiki-transparency, please message me on this page unless there are pressing reasons to do otherwise. Comments which I find to be uncivil, full of vulgarities, flame baiting, or that are excessively rude may be deleted without response. If I choose not to answer, that's my right; don't keep putting it back. I'll just delete and get annoyed at you.

Honorifics

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

Talkback

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

Ebionites

I have recently removed material again from the above article, which had previously been tagged for violations of SYNTH and WEIGHT. Amusingly, and somewhat amazingly, whoever decided to restore it decided to restore it with the tags, which fairly clearly fails to meet WP:BURDEN. I think you have access to reference sources regarding this topic, or at least know where to get them, and your input would be more than welcome. And, yes, given that the ALA is the largest librarian organization in the world, I think that the reference sources they consider outstanding and highly regarded are probably the best indicators of the content of our own articles. Additional eyes watching the page are very definitely welcome, and I believe that this broad issue is probably one of those which will have to be dealt with in any guidelines, basically, the opinions of non-notable or barely notable religious groups, and/or those academic sources which have received comparatively little support. John Carter (talk) 22:41, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry John, I have no sources on this and really no interest. I don't think I've ever edited the article. I agree with your last sentence and will put it on my watch list. Dougweller (talk) 13:59, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Doug, you might want to add this article to your watch list while you are at it. I have already informed Ian Rose, the admin that passed the nomination for FA yesterday. This is probably not going to end well. Ignocrates (talk) 18:51, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it ever would have started had people bothered to consult the leading reference source in the field. The fact that such was, apparently, not done is a very good indication that it will not end well for someone, at least. John Carter (talk) 19:08, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ANP

Thank you for your message. The link to ANP (http://www.americannaziparty.com/about/index.php) which existed before my edit lists Suhayda as it's President. ANP14 is identical website and has the same content. I can switch the links if you want. Again, the link www.americannaziparty.com existed before my edit and is the original ANP. The HITMANACTUAL (talk) 14:33, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am repeating myself too. Again, the page before my edit and as it exists right now, under "Website" contains a link to Suhayda's ANP. The HITMANACTUAL (talk) 15:07, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok then that was the confusion, as I went by that link originally. I'll do some more research on the link between the two parties. What's the requirement, legality? Also how would you feel about creating a page for Suhayda's ANP, since that is the prominent Nazi Party in the United States (I think). I am inexperienced in creating a page. Thanks. The HITMANACTUAL (talk) 15:36, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that confusion, the link thas been there quite a while and I didn't notice. See WP:ORG for the criteria required to create an article. A party's website would be a reliable source for what it says it says, but not for what it does/stands for etc - it has been known for political parties to lie!. Dougweller (talk) 16:27, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Somali people are of mixed race

Sorry about that Dougweller i was unsure where to place Somalis. But Somalis are multiracial. Their Y DNA is 80% E1b1b, 10% T, and 5% J. Somalis are a mixture of themselves, Arabs, and Persians. Those numbers are not exact for all Somalis cause of ranges of mixture among them. This is clearly shown in the different features they have.

"Besides comprising the majority of the Y DNA in Somalis, the E1b1b1a (formerly E3b1a) haplogroup also makes up a significant proportion of the paternal DNA of Ethiopians, Sudanese, Egyptians, Berbers, North African Arabs, as well as many Mediterranean and Balkan Europeans.[1][2] The M78 subclade of E1b1b is found in about 77% of Somali males,[3] which, according to Cruciani et al. (2007), may represent the traces of an ancient migration into the Horn of Africa from Egypt/Libya.[4] After haplogroup E1b1b, the second most frequently occurring Y DNA haplogroup among Somalis is the Eurasian haplogroup T (M70),[5] which is found in slightly more than 10% of Somali males. Haplogroup T, like haplogroup E1b1b, is also typically found among populations of Northeast Africa, North Africa, the Near East and the Mediterranean."[6][7] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.215.206 (talk) 16:00, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see where that actually says mixed race. What race are Araba and Persians? And I am still considering how to list Americans. Dougweller (talk) 16:33, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Persians and Arabs are Caucasians. Not all Geneticists consider Somalis Caucasian or "Black"(sorry I forgot the term for it). This is still debate about the origins and race of Somalis. Its best to leave them as Mixed race instead of having them in a certain racial category. Also Americans are not a ethnic group. To be American is to have USA citizenship.

I've seen that, but every member of a ethnic group is also a citizen. I consider myself an ethnic American - my roots are centuries deep, what other ethnic group could I belong to? A lot of other Americans do also. See American ethnicity. My point is that we should not put Somalies in any racial category. Leavng them out of the article doesn't put them in a category. Dougweller (talk) 20:40, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what your saying about Americans being of mixed ancestry but this article is about mixed race not ethnicity. The vast majority of Americans can tell what their race is. Those who can't are usually those of mixed racial ancestry. But what I don't get is your last bit about Somalis. Could you please explain? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.215.206 (talk) 21:10, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:16, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strange genetic genealogy edits

Doug I agree with you. These edits are nonsensical OR. I see that as an IP, the same editor (he/she replied to you as an IP on the User talk page) has been busy on one article I watch: Haplogroup J-M267.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 15:04, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More editing activity today.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 20:02, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request for input in drafting potential guidelines

Hi. There are, at present, no particular clear guidelines for religious material here, or, for that matter, guidelines for how to deal with ideas in general, particularly those ideas which might be accepted as true by individuals of a given religious, political, or scientific stance. There have been attempts in the past to draft such guidelines, but they have quickly been derailed. I am dropping this note on the talk pages of a number of editors who I believe have some interest in these topics, such as yourself, and asking them to review the material at User:John Carter/Guidelines discussion and perhaps take part in an effort to decide what should be covered in such guidelines, should they be determined useful, and what phrasing should be used. I would be honored to have your input. John Carter (talk) 19:20, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Bosnian pyramid hoax"

If you have some time, it might be helpful to have your opinions at Talk:Bosnian_pyramids#Move_to_rename_the_article_from_.27Bosnian_pyramids.27_to_.27Bosnian_pyramids_hoax.27 as someone familiar with the article, as an admin, and as someone that might be able to identify editors with backgrounds in archeology. --Ronz (talk) 20:32, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Ronz (talk) 18:03, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reopen arbitration

Fyi, I asked Jayjg to reopen arbitration User_talk:Jayjg#Reopen arbitration. If you can get to it first, please do so, and let's put an end to this. I assume both of you will be involved anyway. Ignocrates (talk) 01:56, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why would I be involved, and why do you think I could reopen it? I don't recall being involved in this. Dougweller (talk) 14:31, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Because you made this post to my talk page concerning the arbitration case. Ignocrates (talk) 16:00, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, forgot because nothing happened so I was only briefly clerking it. But I'm not a clerk now so can't do anything about it. Dougweller (talk) 16:17, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, should I proceed by asking someone who is currently a clerk to reopen the case or does that request need to come from an admin? Ignocrates (talk) 16:44, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ask a clerk what has to be done to reopen the case. Dougweller (talk) 17:04, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I will. Thanks. Ignocrates (talk) 17:48, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fyi, I was able to locate the archived case file here with a major assist from the help desk. I have brought it to the clerk's attention and asked Brad to reinstate the arbitration case. Ignocrates (talk) 00:00, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Australian roads)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Australian roads). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:16, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Spamming

User:Johnleeds1 is spamming multiple articles with a huge diagram (i.e. [1]) despite objections from multiple editors. What should i do? He doesn't communicate much either. Pass a Method talk 18:21, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pass a Method you did not ask me to communicate with you. You just go around having a go at me all the time behind my back but never asked me to talk with you --Johnleeds1 (talk) 21:43, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kushwaha

Please could you consider re-protecting Kushwaha. - Sitush (talk) 10:21, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:ROO BOOKAROO

Hello. I would like to notify you that this user keeps inserting OR to various Christianity-related articles [2][3][4][5][6] (mind the non-sensical edit summaries). S/he has been repeatedly asked [7][8][9] to either start justifying her/his edits or to stay away from certain articles. I'm wondering whether her/his declining to do so is a sufficient reason for a block. --Omnipaedista (talk) 08:27, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Refered > Referred

Please see this
If there are other problems with the page Gates of Alexander, please correct them; but don't just do a revert to reinstate a spelling mistake- Arjayay (talk) 15:23, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that was not my intent, I missed the spelling mistake in my reversion of the original research in the article - I don't see my edit summary as meaningless at all. Dougweller (talk) 15:29, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh hell, I see what happened, clicked on the wrong thing - I didn't miss the spelling mistake, it goes away when I remove the original research. Careless of me. Dougweller (talk) 15:32, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No worries - a person who has never made a mistake, has never done anything - Arjayay (talk) 15:36, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Era Reversions

Hey. This is Dcastorina. I do not like the way the eras are represented on a page based on a Catholic subject. I am a Catholic is it is offensive to me to have the Tetragrammaton's history be expressed with BCE and CE. I would like it to be expressed in the Catholic Church's view of B(efore)C(hrist) and AD. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcastorina (talk • contribs) 17:16, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why should the Catholic Church's preference (if that is the case) be favored over anyone else's? If we did that we'd have to alter every other article vaguely related to the Catholic Church. That's why we have WP:ERA - you have to argue on the article's discussion page for a change based on the article itself. Dougweller (talk) 17:36, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 June 2013

Mount Sinai: 28 June 2013

Hi Doug,

You removed my recent addition to Mount Sinai as unverifiable fringe evidence. I think it's important in this article to point out that a video-record has been kept of the Jabal al-Laws site showing a number of unique features that match the biblical description, even if it is a terse or merely referential statement.

The video does exist and there are many excerpts on YouTube, many people have seen the larger part of the video documentary, and Caldwell maintains a website [Split Rock Foundation] which is currently undergoing content improvement. I'm sure that he will be able to authenticate his existence and any further archaeologial verifications that accompany his video record.

On a final note, there will always be disagreement with any proposition regardless of video/dvd evidence for many reasons: scientists (and I include archaeologists) tend to be protective of their ideas, and there are even christian church denominational leaders who will disagree with evidence on the basis of the fact that they want to play a prominent role in any major theological discovery. It's worth noting that it's alleged by those who support Richard Caldwell (though I don't know whether by Caldwell himself) that he was arrested by the Saudi authorities, because a christian archaeologist who was supposedly assisting him in his first expedition contacted the Saudi authorities to warn them of Caldwell's presence in order to have Caldwell arrested and to take the prominent role in the original discovery. It's not been unknown for scientists to go to such lengths.

If there's any further evidence required, could you please fill me in as to what it should be.

Thanks,

Qlj — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qlj (talk • contribs) 14:50, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The unverified stuff was about Caldwell himself, see WP:BLP - perhaps that can be verified. But the real issue is that it is WP:FRINGE, WP:UNDUE applies here I believe. If it's discussed in major media sources or in sources that meet our criteria at WP:RS, maybe it can be included. But just having gone there and made a video, etc isn't enough for inclusion. Maybe this should be on the article's talk page. Dougweller (talk) 15:21, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Doug, Thank you for the clarification. Qlj (talk) 16:41, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That IP

I already gave them a soft edit-warring template earlier today, which I assume counts as a formal 3RR warning? (It mentions 3RR and points out that breaking it will result in a block.) --McGeddon (talk) 15:38, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

True, but the IP is theoretically new (possibly not of course) and I wanted to make sure they understood, and that pov wasn't an exception. Then I noticed the other article. Dougweller (talk) 16:13, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Trademarks

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Trademarks. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:16, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

La Ciudad Blanca

Thanks for taking a look at the article on La Ciudad Blanca. My edits there resulted in a constant struggles with one editor who has apparently relented in his deletions and reversions for the time being. I think the article runs the risk of contributing to and perpetuating misinterpretations and incorrect information, thereby adding to the hype about a "legend" that is being actively promoted for commercial purposes. It is essential to separate fact from fiction (and rumor and speculation). Hoopes (talk) 22:48, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Doug Weller. You have new messages at Talk:Batman.
Message added 10:38, 29 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SudoGhost 10:38, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kariong/Batman

I really find it an unfair act for you to remove EVERYTHING and not at least EDIT SOME BITS OUT (why revert the Batman one to a month ago?). I've always edited and created pages here until someone else comes along reverting everything I'm doing for the sake of ad hominem. Just because I lightly copyrighted something, which I then corrected by summarizing them in my words doesn't mean the content is still copyrighted. And I if I write my own stuff I believe you will tag me as "OR - Original research".

I see that you're an ancient Egypt fan. Look, the Gosford Glyph section isn't supposed to be bias - we must hear the opinions of every public figure. If it's a fringe theory then why revert to the old version? Why not COMPLETELY REMOVE the paragraph? The original section of the 'Gosford Glyphs' is rather vague, source-less and, well, a fringe theory, is it not? Why pick on MY VERSION?

Lionhead99 (talk)

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference Cruciani2004 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Hassan et al. (2008)
  3. ^ Cite error: The named reference Sanchez2005 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ Cruciani, F; La Fratta, R; Trombetta, B; Santolamazza, P; Sellitto, D; Colomb, EB; Dugoujon, JM; Crivellaro, F; Benincasa, T; et al. (2007). "Tracing Past Human Male Movements in Northern/Eastern Africa and Western Eurasia: New Clues from Y-Chromosomal Haplogroups E-M78 and J-M12". Molecular Biology and Evolution. 24 (6): 1300–1311. doi:10.1093/molbev/msm049. PMID 17351267Template:Inconsistent citations {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |last= (help)CS1 maint: postscript (link) Also see Supplementary Data.
  5. ^ Underhill, JR; Rowold, DJ; Regueiro, M; Caeiro, B; Cinnio�lu, C; Roseman, C; Underhill, PA; Cavalli-Sforza, LL; Herrera, RJ (2004). "The Levant versus the Horn of Africa: Evidence for Bidirectional Corridors of Human Migrations". American Journal of Human Genetics. 74 (3): 532–544. doi:10.1086/382286. PMC 1182266. PMID 14973781. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |author-name-separator= (help); Unknown parameter |author-separator= ignored (help); replacement character in |last5= at position 7 (help)
  6. ^ Cabrera, Vicente M.; Abu-Amero, Khaled K.; Larruga, José M.; González, Ana M. (2009). "The Arabian peninsula: Gate for Human Migrations Out of Africa or Cul-de-Sac? A Mitochondrial DNA Phylogeographic Perspective". Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology Series. Part 2: 79–87. doi:10.1007/978-90-481-2719-1_6.
  7. ^ Fadhlaoui-Zid, K.; Plaza, S.; Larruga, José M.; González, Ana M. (2009). "Mitochondrial DNA Heterogeneity in Tunisian Berbers". Annals of Human Genetics. 68 (3): 222–233. doi:10.1046/j.1529-8817.2004.00096.x. PMID 15180702. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |unused_data= ignored (help)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Doug_Weller&oldid=562093500"