User talk:66.73.198.159

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

It's been explained in nauseating detail on Talk:List of ethnic groups. If reading is a problem for you, perhaps you can increase the font size on your browser. --Calton | Talk 15:07, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

I am not going to get involved in this disspute.15:08, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

My problem is that the majority of wikipedia members are bigots No, your problem is that you don't know what you're talking about -- and if you're who I think you are, you've also got a problem with paranoia. --Calton | Talk 15:18, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

Should I remove all Native American tribes or should I add all Ireland tribes? Neither. You should go edit articles you know something about. --Calton | Talk 15:22, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

Irish-Americans the the second most descriminated against group in America after African-Americans. That statement is not only subliterate, but, in the words of Wolfgang Pauli, that statement is not only not right, it's not even wrong. --Calton | Talk 15:26, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

It's a true statement and that's all that matters No, it's obvious bullshit, and no one could possibly utter it and still keep a straight face. --Calton | Talk 15:39, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

Repeat[edit]

Since you clearly didn't read this the first time, let's try again, you teenage Texan wannabe-Irishman:

Please don't add "ethnic" groups that consist of the names of originating ethnicities yoked together with a hyphen. They don't form distinct groups in the way, say, "Cherokee" do. You can clearly see what the point of the page is. Don't start overburdening it with nonsense groups. What next, "Lithuanian-Japanese" because my grandpa's from Lithuania, and my grandma's Japanese? Clair de Lune 02:57, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

And your other additions were worse. Are you planning to add "London Irish" for people with Irish ancestry in London? "Manchester Irish"? "Stockport Japanese"? "Oslo Hindu"? Are you not seeing why that's a bad idea? "Irish traveller" is a possibility, given that it is a distinct cultural group. I'll add that back in. But not the others, unless you can give good reason for distinguishing them from other people of Irish ancestry in other parts of the world. Clair de Lune 03:01, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

You just don't get it. "South Side Irish" are not different from any other type of "Irish". If you add in this level of granularity, the page will need to include every community that once migrated. You are not distinguishing "ethnic groups". You are distinguishing communities that self-identify for one reason or another but do not in themselves form an ethnos. Please don't. There would be hundreds of thousands of similar groups worldwide. Here in Australia, every city has a community -- some quite large -- that would fit your criteria. But they are not separate ethnicities. A Greek-Australian in Brisbane is not distinct from a Greek-Australian in Melbourne. Clair de Lune 03:09, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

How are South Side Irish different from other "Irish"? Do they speak a different language? Eat different foods? Have their own dances? Tell me, because I'm not convinced. People from any particular place think they are different from other people. But this doesn't make them an ethnic group. This is a degree of difference far beyond just living in a different city. Clair de Lune 03:18, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, people from different ethnic groups marry all the time. But that doesn't make their kids a new "ethnic group". You are not understanding what an "ethnic group" is. Do "Irish-Italians" speak any differently from "Italians"? Do they do wear clothes particular to their group? Do they have a creation myth? Do they have special marriage ceremonies? No, they don't have any of those things. What they have is one "Italian" parent and one "Irish" parent. They are no more an "ethnic group" than Chinese-Greeks or Liberian-Zimbabweans. You are mistaking the concept of an ethnic group for the labelling of ethnicities that is common in the States and other places largely populated by relatively recent immigrants. As an editor of Wikipedia, I remain within the bounds of our policies. I won't be removing your "ethnic groups" again today. That would be a breach of the three revert rule. However, I will be back tomorrow, and the next day, and the next day, and I'll keep removing your additions until you either give good reason for including them by answering the questions I have asked above or give up. Why not save me the time and effort and change the article back to the version I saved? I included Irish Traveller, which I agree should be included (clearly a separate ethnic group, with its own language and culture) and your edits to Irish-American. The others though would simply open a floodgate. Clair de Lune 03:25, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

I would have a problem with it but I can't see it! I can't see any kind of Mexican at all.Clair de Lune 03:29, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, but you're not suggesting what makes them distinct. I've had a look and all I can find is people who say they are "Irish to the core". They seem to think they are of Irish ethnicity. Clair de Lune 03:33, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Just a friendly warning. Constantly reverting an article is frowned on. We've both gone close to the limit of what's permitted. You've reverted another editor as well. You're only allowed three a day. If you keep doing it, you're liable to be blocked. See this policy article. Now, I'm not going to ask for action against you because we're talking it over and I don't like telltaling a fellow editor, but I will ask you to consider not getting into a huge conflict over it and getting yourself blocked, because other editors won't mind having you booted. Clair de Lune 03:38, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Would you mind giving me specific examples of groups you feel shouldn't be included and I should have also excluded? You are more than welcome to remove them yourself and direct any complaints to this talk page, where I have made the case for excluding "ethnicities" that are just labels. Clair de Lune 03:42, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

My understanding of Tejanos is that they are descendants of the population of Texas before it became incorporated into the United States, and of chicanos that they are descendants of any Mexicans who have immigrated into the States. It's a fine difference but each has traditions that differs from the other. If you erased Tejanos, I wouldn't necessarily complain. You could ask anyone who did complain to explain exactly how they are distinguished from other chicanos. But you should ask with the intention of being sympathetic to their explanation. I am trying to give you every chance to make your case, although you are not doing so. You could win it comprehensively by finding a source for their being a separate ethnic group.

As for Native Americans, these peoples have formed separate cultural groups for many centuries. They speak different (although sometimes related languages). They could be compared with Europeans, rather than Irish immigrants.

You still haven't described how the groups you want to include are distinguished from other Irish-American groups in any way except living in a different part of the United States. I gave you a good reason not to include migrants on purely geographical grounds. I recognise that there are ethnic groups that distinguish themselves on a fairly slim basis, but yours are, to my mind, on the wrong side of the line. Clair de Lune 03:53, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Bronx Irish Catholics[edit]

Hi. Thanks for leaving word on my talk page. The reason I deleted the article was because it was little more than a "predicate nominative," that is, just an opening sentence which one could clearly ascertain from the title. As I recall, it wasn't much more than "Bronx Irish Catholics are Catholics of Irish decent who live in the Bronx." Kind of a circular argument, eh?  :)

If you wish to recreate the article, by all means please feel free to do so, but it should be greatly expanded with some history, some contributions, how a Bronx Irish Catholic is somehow unique, perhaps some examples of famous Bronx Irish Catholics. If you can assert notability, not only will the article stay, I predict it will florish. Hope this helps. - Lucky 6.9 17:30, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

My pleasure. Glad to be of service...and glad you caught me. I was just logging out. - Lucky 6.9 22:41, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Block[edit]

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia for using a different IP address to evade a block placed on your previous address. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. Mark1 01:42, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Markalexander100[edit]

Markalexander does not know what he is talking about. I did not create a sockpocket to evade a block. It just so happens that my IP address changed, it happens every so often.

Markalexander100 has lied about me. He just made something up. I think he should apologize to me and he also needs to figure out what is actually going on.

This isn't the first time Markalexander100 has acted like he is clueless, he has reverted edits on pages but has reverted them so that actual useful information is removed as well. He doesn't realize he should just edit out what he wants to edit out, instead of reverting, which removes other additions. 66.73.198.159 00:37, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Please read WP:3RR. This policy applies to each person. . Mark1 02:02, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Gregraige[edit]

I would, but I have a strong antipathy towards the Gregraige. I think they're lazy, they beat their wives and they drink too much.

Lapsed Pacifist 03:01, 26 August 2005 (UTC)