User talk:Pepperbeast

Welcome!

Hello, Pepperbeast, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipediakko
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  Chris 23:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Börek‎

Hi! Thanks for your message - however, the changes I made ARE relevant - Börek‎ is not made within Armenia and the whole section of the article is a misnomer and shouldn't be there - using foreign ingredient names not at all familiar in Armenia. If I made formatting mistakes, than please help me correct - and let me know how to proceed with the article. I am trying to help, no vandalism at all involved. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hbabayan (talk • contribs) 12:58, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

That's fine, but you need to use the discussion page before making major changes or at least provide edit summaries, not just blank sections you don't agree with. In any case, a quick Google search for "Armenian boereg" suggests that you are mistaken. Beastiepaws (talk) 20:14, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!Hbabayan (talk) 03:25, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Now who's blanking an entire section? The recent addition to Albanian Byrek was awfully long-winded, I'll agree, but it wasn't completely redundant. I hope I successfully managed to squeeze the important components into the paragraph. Bon Appétit. --@Efrat (talk) 14:05, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I never said it was completely redundant, and I only undid the changes. That's not the same as blanking the section. I'm sorry l didn't have time to rewrite what looked like some very hastily tacked-on comments. Beastiepaws (talk) 19:38, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

No need to be sorry. I wasn't criticizing, just a little friendly poking. Anyway, I hope my edit was worthy. --@Efrat (talk) 05:06, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Mince meat article

Hi Beastiepaws. I am for ridding wikipedia of urban myth and old wives tales but the The Cambridge World History of Food discusses the use of clove and cinnamon bark in at least two places, one about mince meat, being used to mask off flavors. CApitol3 (talk) 13:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi again Beastiepaws. Perhaps the "World History of Food" is wrong. I see the Scully endnote. I'm at owrk not a home now. I'll revert my undo, and recheck tonight. CApitol3 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 14:07, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I was pretty sure there is no meat in mince meat. I thought someone else was putting that in to throw people off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.40.29.14 (talk) 20:26, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Coriander

Please do not categorize my edits as vandalism, as you did in your edit summary for Coriander. It is well known that people who taste soap while eating cilantro are genetically defective, and my edits were in good faith. riffic (talk) 01:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Your edit was, at best, unconstructive. The article on coriander states there is no established genetic basis for differences in perception of coriander and provides references to back up the claim. Even it it *were* genetically based, that wouldn't make people who perceive a particular flavour "defective". Genetic variations are not not necessarily defects. They're just variations. Beastiepaws (talk) 02:12, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

March 2009

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below.

Spamming and vandalism. LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

{{unblock|reason}}

I have contacted the blocking admin. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 19:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Beastiepaws (talk) 21:41, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Society for Creative Anachronism

The 'Facts versus opinions about The Society for Creative Anachronism ' section you were involved in was moved to bottom to be in chronological order. Thank you. RJFJR (talk) 20:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Brilliant, thanks :-) Beastiepaws (talk) 21:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Mastic (resin) it is not Gum arabic !!!

" Gum arabic " system made of acacia tree ! , And " Mastic " is made out of Pistacia lentiscus tree ! . Unfortunately many people in the world do not know this spice is known to only a few in the Middle East , And a secret except for people as a great healer. I ask not to be confused with Gum arabic is something else entirely! . " Mastic is made of wood and Pistacia lentiscus ". And Gum arabic is produced from a Acacia tree resin. This spice also does not appear in any dictionary in the world and the first time he appears in the encyclopedia That he always appears in the encyclopedia as a " resin of Pistacia lentiscus " . burekas (talk) 09:01, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Beastiepaws, thanks for your persistent effort at working the mastic article into shape. It got speedily deleted in other languages such as Catalan as an incomprehensible translation (traducció automàtica incomprensible), but here in English it seems to be worth keeping. I intend to continue helping, but some days I have limited energy available for this. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 22:02, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Bill-- I appreciate that. I'm doing my best, but having to tuck it in around Real Life. :-) Beastiepaws (talk) 22:52, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Beastiepaws, Why delete the line about " Athens University " ? burekas (talk) 23:39, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Because it was an uncited claim. Beastiepaws (talk) 00:22, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I inquired and found there are some imitations and substitutes for " Mastic " Because of the high price, Such as :

1 - Pine tree resin

2 - Almond tree resin

3 - Boswellia tree resin

i think we should put New paragraph for it also . burekas (talk) 22:33, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

You should use the talk page for the mastic article to discuss this. Beastiepaws (talk) 22:38, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Mastic ice cream

i see that you don't live in the Middle East. i just only want to tell you that "DONDURMA IS NOT "BOOZA". פארוק (talk) 08:52, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Shrug. You didn't make a 'booza' article, just a 'mastic ice cream' one that was substantially the same as Dondurma. The only difference you've really asserted between the two is that Dondurma is the name used in Turkey and Booza elsewhere. That's not a real difference. Anyway, I didn't actually make the decision-- if you're not happy, you need to talk to the admin who made the deletion. Beastiepaws (talk) 18:45, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

maybe the name is the same name to Ice cream. but it's not the same ice cream. i write it in the talk page. פארוק (talk) 07:38, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Booza have a softer texture than Dondurma. Dondurma is much harder texture. that what is trying to tell you becouse the arabic ice cream is a stolen recipe that improved to a new recipe for the hot sun of arabian deserts. becouse this ice cream is not melting so fast in the sun. the syrian ice cream is the arabic version of this ice cream. פארוק (talk) 07:38, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

So that's it? It's pretty much like dondurma, only a bit softer? Beastiepaws (talk) 20:58, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

no. it's not the same texture. it's more softer, the recipe is a little differnet. פארוק (talk) 08:52, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Gráinne O'Malley

You ought not have moved that back. There was a very small consensus to move from Gráinne Ní Mháille. But there is not consensus to prefer Grace O'Malley over Gráínne O'Malley. -- Evertype·✆ 21:19, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Pardon me for disagreeing. The discussion was held, and the commenters favoured Grace O'Malley for reasons stated. Nobody seemed to favour Gráínne O'Malley. In any case, you showed up after the move was made and moved it again without bothering to discuss it with anyone. If you want to re-open the discussion in the article's talk page, go for it, but you don't get to move stuff around to suit yourself. Beastiepaws (talk) 21:32, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Colombo spice mixture

I don't know where my original edit summary went but the reason I deleted Colombo as a spice mixture was that I couldn't find a reliable source for the constituents. There wasn't even a consensus as there is for, say, 5-spice or Garam masala. None of the sources I found used paprika. With the possible exception of poultry spice, the items in the list probably ought to be notable enough to have their own articles, anyway. - Pointillist (talk) 21:12, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Apologies about the edit to the article on spinach

Many apologies about my edits to the article on spinach - I was doing it quite late last night (May 17 2011) and only had a fairly "popular" book on food and nutrition to reference at hand! I just thought that the famous story about the German researcher getting the decimal point in the wrong place in calculating how much iron there is in spinach really was famous enough to go in the article. I can assure that I was not vandalising the article - that story is a famous story, and the man who published the book really had published it under the name "Professor Spoon"! ACEOREVIVED (talk) 20:01, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

My apologies for labelling it vandalism-- I made the change, and then realised it was more like messy good faith. Sorry to say the "famous story" is, at best, apocryphal-- you can probably guess that from the way he's referred to as "Doktor Spatula". 132.181.149.156 (talk) 20:24, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Beastiepaws (talk) 20:25, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry - the German researcher was actually called E. Wolff, and he did his researh in the 1870s. You can find more on this on the last external link currently given on the talk page on spinach. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 16:19, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Removing Unsourced Material

For what it's worth, if I see unsourced material and can't identify the contributor, I generally will tag it rather than doing an outright removal. In this case I was able to identify the contributor, and consequently reverted the material directly. I will also usually (though not always) provide them with an advisory regarding sourcing policies. For the record, while I will be the first to agree that tagging is generally better form than simply removing material, it is not a requirement, and IMO it is better to nip unsourced material in the bud when possible, and give the contributor a chance to provide a source, rather than to tag it and allow it to linger indefinitely...after all, who better to source information than the person who added it to the article in the first place? You may also wish to review WP:BURDEN. In any case, I see it's been sourced now, so all well and good. Cheers. Doniago (talk) 05:15, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Kiryat Menachem Begin

"Kiryat Menachem Begin" in East Jerusalem IS NOT "Kiryat HaMemshala" in West Jerusalem. please retorn the article. פארוק (talk) 05:35, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

My mistake! Beastiepaws (talk) 06:13, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Photos of Christchurch heritage buildings

I'd like to draw your attention to a new article on historic places in Christchurch. On the article's talk page, there is a list of missing photos. Of the 320 items that are registered with the New Zealand Historic Places Trust in the geographic area of Christchurch (excluding Banks Peninsula), there are only 80 registrations that we haven't got photos of. If you have a camera and would like to contribute, have a look what needs doing. Please leave a note on the talk page if you managed to get some photos, or if you know your way around Wikimedia Commons, you could upload them directly (note that it's complicated and I recommend that you start by leaving a note if you've never uploaded to Commons before). Thanks for your consideration! Schwede66 05:30, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Coriander Article

Hello I am the person who edited the coriander article, I don't mean to cause any problems, but in biology, I was told that coriander was an annual weed, and not an herb. I didn't edit the article as vandilism, I edited the article as a correction. Sorry about the notice. Sincerely, 71.190.230.254 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.230.254 (talk) 02:22, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I find that a little unlikely, since you felt you had to change words like "fruit" and "plant" to "weed" as well as changing the title of a reference. I suggest you look up the definitions of herb and weed. Beastiepaws (talk) 02:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I understand your point, have a nice night, sorry about the inconvenience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.230.254 (talk) 03:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

World Bible Center

Pretty sure the World Bible Center article should be deleted, as the text is pretty garbled, and, as far as I can make out, the centre doesn't exist yet. I'm not sure how to handle this Beastiepaws (talk) 09:09, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

i don't cry for Anti semitic wikipedia becouse she delet articles. פארוק (talk) 09:58, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Kindly withdraw your personal attack. Haven't you been warned enough times to know better? Beastiepaws (talk) 10:06, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Do you know why i am angry ? ....We have talked about deleting when I created the article ! So why we need to repeat it again ? that It annoys me. פארוק (talk) 10:45, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

That doesn't give you the right to launch personal attacks. Beastiepaws (talk) 10:50, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't attacked you. i only say that wikipedia let others people write about Palestine although it state that does not exist ! , While others can't write true facts about Israel. פארוק (talk) 10:55, 14 August 2012 (UTC)