User talk:Humus sapiens: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 01:35, 26 April 2006

Welcome to my talk page. Please

scroll down to add a new message Template:Add

?	Four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message would automagically sign and date it. Usually I will respond on your Talk page or on the Talk page of the specific article. The puzzle is discussed here. To send me an email message, see the left-hand panel.

Archived talks: | 1 | AS | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

Thanks for the kind words!

HS,

Thanks for the kind words. It's a little frustrating at first to have even simple grammatical edits reverted, but it looks like this is more of an exception than the rule on Wikipedia. Thank you for the compliments; I am looking forward to collaborating with you as well!

--CommonGround 16:59, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Aqsa Intifada

The following highly dubious information is completely uncited in that section of Al-Aqsa Intifada.

"They claim that Arabs "used the visit as an excuse for the violence that the Arabs planned to carry out after the failure of the Camp David summit in July, 2000" Some Palestinian officials admitted this claim"

"The killings were captured on video by an Italian TV crew and broadcast on TV; the picture (to the right) of one of the lynchers waving his blood-stained hands from the window, shocked and outraged many around the world, and became another iconic image".

So why did you remove the fact tags?

Secondly, can you explain why you removed all mention of the Israeli rioting, despite it being an enormously significant event that contributed to the violence and was mentioned in the Or inquiry?

In response to the Arab Israeli riots, thousands of Jewish Israelis rioted in Nazareth and Tel Aviv, throwing stones at Arabs, destroying Arab property and chanting "Death to Arabs" ^[1]. Two Arabs were killed in the violence and Haaretz editorialized that that year's "Yom Kippur will be infamous for the violent, racist outburst by Jews against Arabs within Israel" ^[2].

Deuterium 07:47, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

are you listening what are told? or you'd like to get new reasoning about the same issue? --tasc 08:45, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good Eye on the Luther and the Jews

Dear Humus:

Good eye! I'm glad someone else has the page watchlisted!

BTW, when's Passowver this year? --CTSWyneken 02:38, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A blessed and joyful Passover to you my friend! --CTSWyneken 01:38, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ZIONISM

? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Standish7 (talk • contribs)

Guidelines for Wikipedia lists of ethnic groups

Please may I draw your attention to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Guidelines_for_Wikipedia_lists_of_ethnic_groups

Your contributions would be very welcome.

Brownlee 11:35, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I had to revert you at A-S

Thank you for the welcome. I'm sorry that I have to revert you at A-S as well. We don't seek to demonize. We seek to provide more information. --Liquid Love 12:48, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can ignore this Humus; it's banned User:Zephram Stark up to his old tricks. Jayjg ^(talk) 16:53, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re:map

Thanks for the compliment and suggestion. As you can see here I am having trouble converting the illustrator file to an SVG that will work once uploaded. If you have any ideas, I'd be glad to hear them!--Andrew c 14:47, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vorkuta

Hi! In September of 2004 you added an image to the Vorkuta article. The image included a caption comparing the Soviet slogan at the entrance to the town with German's slogan Arbeit macht frei. I found that comparison to be somewhat biased and inaccurate, and thus removed the comparative portion of the caption. This, however, ignited a revert war over the caption among other users. I have abstained from the discussion and protected the article today to prevent further reverts. I am wondering, however, if you would be interested to join the discussion at Talk:Vorkuta. I thought that you as the originator should know about this debate. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) • (yo?); 15:12, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy

Hey Humus, do you agree with the changes that grasshopper made to this page in you name?- [1]

Shtetl

Sorry, I didn't know you were editing at the same time. BTW, can you look at my proposal on Talk:Shtetl to move most of the article's content to a separate list? Cheers, Pecher ^Talk 20:38, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Jewish legion hakotel 1917.jpg

Hi Humus - I am currently translating article Western Wall into Italian (see here - the article is currently called Wailing Wall, but it will be moved to Westernat the end of translation), and to be able to use the image in the title I had to copy from en.wiki and upload to commons. I have shown your name as first uploader, and I hope you will forgive if I will appear as uploader in commons.
I would be grateful if you could review the type of license - the one in Commons is not the same as in en.wiki. All the best. UbUb 11:38, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
PS : this is my user page in it.wiki

Image Tagging for Vorkuta entrance

Thanks for uploading Image:Vorkuta_entrance_Labor_in_the_USSR_is_a_matter_of_honor,_glory,_pride_and_heroism.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:39, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

admin

I noticed a little while ago that you have 11,000+ edits, and are somehow not an admin. If I nominated you, would you accept the nom? --Bachrach44 18:46, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another Sockpuppet?

Greetings having followed a bit of the talk and edits on The Protocols of the Elders of Zion , I couldn't help notice how much User:Jibal's edits are like User:69.248.237.88's (who in fact was admin User:Arminius, see this report and this). I noticed that you had tangled a bit with User:69.248.237.88 and so I thought you should be aware of my concerns. Netscott 07:25, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

you've been nominated

Bachrach44 would like to nominate you to be an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Bachrach44 to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Humus sapiens. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

Whenever you're ready to go, add your sub-page to the WP:RFA page. (I've already entered my "seed" vote, so there's no need to wait for me). Instructions are here. Keep in mind that people frequently ask more questions, so if you're not going to be online for the last 2 days of pesach, you may want to hold off till after the chag, but it's entirely up to you. --Bachrach44 02:42, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Temple in Jerusalem dates

I'm somewhat puzzled by your remarks in the edit history above article. WP:MOS clearly states that both BCE/CE and BC/AD are commonly accepted. The original article used BC/AD until you changed it. While I would agree with you that it's been changed long enough ago that a wholesale change back to BC/AD doesn't make sense, I do disagree with your initial change, as well as the (as least that's how it appears to me) arrogant way in which you point to WP:MOS as if it supports your view. Hirudo 03:54, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the RfA Vote!

Dear Humus: Thanks for the vote of confidence on the RfA, even though I doubt I'll be approved. Would you do me another favor? User Doright has appeared on my RfA and is commenting negatively, as you might imagine. Since I've long ago committed to ignoring him, would you offer some insight, since you were there during most of it?

I hope that you had a joyful and fulfilling Passover! --CTSWyneken 16:02, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your RfA

FYI, Masssiveego has added questions to the end of your RfA. JoshuaZ 21:35, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Luther (Again)

SlimVirgin is backing Doright in an attempt to list Luther in both the catagory of Antisemitism (which was our comprimise, if you recall) and Antisemitic people. Would you weigh in? It's beginning to be an edit war. --CTSWyneken 01:59, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michaels did not say the words in the quote

Dear Humus: Did you miss my note on the talk page? These are not Dr. Michael's words. Doright has confused an abstract with his words. In the essay itself, Dr. Michael says nothing of the kind. He sharply criticizes a number of Luther scholars, but nothing like what the abstractor says. In short, it is a fraud. I can help you get a hold of the essay, if you'd like. But I will not support academic fraud.

Also, since you're here, I'd like your opinion on my actions in the latest dust up. Am I at all out of line? --CTSWyneken 02:52, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you dropping by. I saw that you didn't change the attribution, which was my concern. I don't know about the title, since, to be fair, we would be using full titles with all the scholars. That could get a little unwieldy. But that's simply my preferences. I have nothing against putting in the title itself. --CTSWyneken 10:31, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Humus: Would you change the ascription to the Michael's quote back? An edit war will ensue if I have to do it. I cannot in good conscience leave this alone, since I have the essay in front of me and these are not Michael's words. If you'd like, I can help you get the essay. Thanks! --CTSWyneken 12:21, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Luther

Dear Humus:

That would be fine. I respect Dr. Michael a great deal. He has a strong opinion that naturally many disagree with, but he is always a gentleman. When you're done, I would appreciate having you verify my words to be true. It would help much to have an independent verification of my integrity.

There actually is much that will be useful on the Martin Luther and the Jews page as well. Luther is much more complex than his cheerleaders in Lutheranism portray him or the he was just a hater of Jews crowd proclaim.

In the in end, it makes little difference. His hateful words are completely unacceptable and harmful, even if they were not the cause of the Nazi attrocities nor particularly infleuncial between his time and theirs.

Still, between us, I think we can work to represent the scholarship on the issue, no matter what others do. --CTSWyneken 10:32, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

His words were extremely influential in Nazi Germany. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 11:08, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Count

Hi Humus sapiens,

I'm giving you your edit count, as I thought it might help you in your RfA. I used Flcelloguy's Tool (the others are out of whack), so the information is correct as of 08:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC).[reply]

And now (drum roll, please), your stats:

Statistics for: Humus sapiens
(Permissions: N/A)
- Total: 11, 809 -
Main: 6977
Talk: 2050
User: 521
User talk: 887
Wikipedia: 562
Wikipedia talk: 48
Image: 262
Image talk: 13
Template: 242
Template talk: 111
Category: 18
Category talk: 11
Portal: 98
Portal talk: 9
-------------------
Total edits: 11809
Minor edits: 1576
Edits with edit summary: 11261
Edits with manual edit summary: 8997
Percent minor edits: 13.34%  *
Percent edit summary use: 95.35%  *
Percent manual edit summary use: 76.18%  *
-------------------
* - percentages are rounded down to the nearest hundredth.
-------------------

OMG!!!

--Primate^#101 08:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hmm, I wouldn;t have said he needed help in his RfA... Palmiro | Talk 09:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, yes, Humus, you're great and everybody loves you. Just don't let it get to your head.--Chodorkovskiy ^(talk) 11:09, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

KKK image

I have no beef with restoring the Holocaust denial image; my major edit was actually a reversion because of the consensus that the article was declining in quality (the image had little to do with it). Ashibaka tock 11:11, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hamas

Hi Humus,

if I can momentarily tear you away from contentedly gazing at your growing pile of RfA votes... (well, that's probably what I'd be doing), I have had some problems at Hamas where my attempts to introduce a couple of factual corrections met with a very hostile response; perhaps my motives were misunderstood. Anyway, I have decided not to edit the page again for the moment, but I must admit I'm still bothered by the inaccuracies; see my latest contribution to the talk page for a summary of the issue, or further up for the full details and unfortunate conversation. I'd appreciate it if you could look into it. Palmiro | Talk 11:25, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exegesis

If you don't understand the comment I left in your RfA, check out Humus Sapien. DS 16:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Felix Landau, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 00:23, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

I'm pleased to inform you that you are now an administrator. Please consider reading all the material on the administrators' reading list before testing out your new privileges. Though everything you do, excluding image deletions and page history merges, is reversible, you should nevertheless be very careful with your sysop capabilities. For instructions, please see the administrators' how-to guide. Good luck! — Dan | talk 00:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My congratulations! Use your tools wisely. :) Kimchi.sg | talk 01:03, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

Congratulations. Here are what pass for words of wisdom from the puppy:

Remember you will always protect the wrong version.
Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. You will always pick the wrong one to do. (See #5)
Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll.
Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block.
Remember when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology.
and finally, Remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able.

KillerChihuahua^?!? 00:52, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales. All rights released under GFDL.

congrats

Well, I was hoping to be the first to officially congratulate you, but it looks like I'll have to settle for being in the first 5. As I mentioned, I really think you deserved it and I'm thrilled that you're the 10th most popular RFA in wiki's history. Best of luck. --Bachrach44 01:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

^ The Or Inquiry - Summary of Events. Haaretz, Tuesday, September 12, 2000. Accessed April 8, 2006.
^ Anti-Arab riots spark Israeli soulsearching. BBC, Wednesday, 11 October, 2000. Accessed April 8, 2006.

[1] The Or Inquiry - Summary of Events. Haaretz, Tuesday, September 12, 2000. Accessed April 8, 2006.

[2] Anti-Arab riots spark Israeli soulsearching. BBC, Wednesday, 11 October, 2000. Accessed April 8, 2006.

[1]

[2]

@@ Line 259: / Line 259: @@
 |style="text-align:center;"|<small>DISCLAIMER:  This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales. All rights released under GFDL.
 |}
+== congrats ==
+Well, I was hoping to be the first to officially congratulate you, but it looks like I'll have to settle for being in the first 5. As I mentioned, I really think you deserved it and I'm thrilled that you're the [[WP:100#Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship|10th most popular RFA]] in wiki's history. Best of luck. --[[User:Bachrach44|Bachrach44]] 01:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)