User talk:Jmabel/Archive 18

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

Macedonians vs. Macedonian Slavs

Dear Jmabel, at the moment there is a poll taking place on the Macedonian Slavs talk page to which you could make a significant contribution. Thank you in advance for your participation. Ivica83 13:27, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Discussion shifting

There is also a discussion about American West going on at Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Regions/General Also your the lead compromiser on this issue but you haven't posted in a while. Is every thing allright? -JCarriker 16:11, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. regions/Maps and tell me what you think, all regions are not yet there are mistakes in two (I do get tired). -JCarriker 21:09, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)
I've responded to you at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. regions/Maps. -JCarriker 21:04, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
Also corrected mistakes with the maps and uploaded new regions. I took alternative when portraying the Great Plains (the article needs to be disambiged from Plains states) and Pacific Northwest with partial shading. Take a look. -JCarriker 22:46, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Homosexual fag

Hey, just b/c these other limp dicked faggots worship your ass, doesn't mean you can fuck around with other people's shit. Mind your own fucking business, bastard.Flgook 18:33, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

FWIW, if anyone is interested, the only page that this user and I seem both to have touched is Abercrombie and Fitch, where I reduced the size of a massive image he added at the top of the article. If the above is not an unwarranted personal attack, I don't know what is. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:46, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Apology, Apology

I'm real sorry about the note that was put on your talk page. My roommate was bored today, and he decided to get on my computer and stir up trouble. I hope that my apology will be accepted as we continue to move on for the Wiki cause. Flgook 22:23, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

African American Literature

Since you started the article on African-American literature, I thought you might like to check out the large numbers of additions I have added. I'd also appreciate any comments or feedback you have on the article. Thanks for starting it. --Alabamaboy 02:15, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi Jmabel, when I saw that WP:POST stated that African American literature was now a FA, I simply couldn't believe that it was the same redlink that nobody wanted to touch on CSB, and had failed at both CSB COTW and wikiwide COTW, before you "bit the bullet". After looking at the article, I actually had to go to the history to make sure that it was one and same. Thanks from me as well for getting the ball rolling. Cheers, BanyanTree 21:18, 11 July 2005 (UTC)


You showed support for the Spanish Translation of the Week. This week es:Joaquín Torres García was chosen to be translated to Joaquín Torres García/Translation.
Cast your VOTE to select next week's translation!

Nominate a good Spanish article


On page Ni-be-ni-me-ni-cucurigu - Lulla Rosenfeld quite possibly does not need a link, I added it while tidying the cat capitalisation; glancing through the article, it appeared to me that the bulk of it seems to rely on her opinion. However, not being too up on Jewish film and theatre, I am not sure of her prominence or authority, I am quite happy to concede to its removal -- Nigosh 08:35, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

left-right politics

Well, I've commented at some length, only to get sidetracked into lengthy arguments with Nobs01 about whether the idea of a left-right spectrum should be described as a "theory" (I say no, because it doesn't make any sense to call it a theory). Nobs is, over all, a strange one, and, I think, pretty clearly a POV pusher. Any aid would be welcome. john k 03:06, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

HBCU outreach

I've put out some feelers and I've gotten the response that the administration would take it more seriously if they had something to specifically to refer them to than a simple invitation. Can you create a page I can refer them to, perhaps another wikiproject or a subpage of systemic bias? Your essay could be housed there as well as the participants particulary interested in outreach, Deeceevoice for instance. P.S. Have you seen the laters U.S. regions maps? You haven't posted on the talk page since they were redone so I have no way of knowing. (Also can we redirect American West, to Quagmire, pretty please. Not serious, well mostly not serious.) -JCarriker 17:43, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

Page is started at Wikipedia:HBCU recruitment. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:18, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
I think we need a particpants list (real names instead of nicks, since we're doing an outreach), so I've added one. When welcoming people who have been invited to the community it is important to make sure they'll be directed to the people most interested in helping them. Also I noticed politcal bias was not listed, there is a dominant politcal view own wikipedia as well, that factors in the same unitentional way that the others do. I don't think an active outreach based on politcal ideas would be a good idea, as I feel neither side is entirely trustworthy or fair minded towards the other, but I think mentioning it may be as noteworthy as the others. It's also a possibility we could eventually be called on it, and in that case it would be a good idea to have already acknowldeged it and point out we're working on it, i.e. Pat Robertson, rather than let some demagogue hurt Wikipedia's reputation by running with the accusation. I'm also going to inform Deeceevoice about the page since it would seem to be right up her alley. -JCarriker 17:44, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

New to Wiki

I think you must have made the original comment on the Philosophy Projects Page The Philosophically Illiterate. It is provoking much useful interest and comment. I have just added a comment but insufficiently indented it (maybe I'll go back and try) but I didn't quite understand the system till I'd already saved my few lines. I wanted to put them under the overall heading which raises a major issue but I couldn't see who had initiated it. Was it you? I am sure I could check by looking on your 'contributions' page but it all gets a bit complicated when you're only just starting. Jeffrey Newman 07:42, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Greater Hungary

I've made an attempt at NPOVing Greater Hungary which has an NPOV. Given that Transylvania is the main conflict point I'd appreciate it if you would review my changes, your knowledge of the the Romanian POV would be helpful. Thanks. -JCarriker 21:23, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

Animated GIF

Hi Jmabel. No, I don't need that animated text by my signature. I was unaware that someone with ADD or dyslexia would have a hard time reading comments that have graphic emoticons, so that's why I removed the emoticon from my text. By the way, I liked the recent edits you did with the new section we started in the White supremacy article. Regards, --Gramaic 02:20, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hungarian versions of place names in articles pertaining to Romania

Hi! There is a bit of a controversy evolving about the Hungarian versions of place names in articles pertaining to Romania. Criztu has started to delete the Hungarian (and in one case, German) variants of place names from the following articles, claiming that they were irrelevant: (Harghita, Covasna_(county), Cluj). I feel this move is unjustified. I would appreciate if you could have a look at the problem and give your opinion on Talk:Harghita.--Tamas 28 June 2005 15:15 (UTC)

Same old subjects

Just some brief comments/inqueries/requests:

1. Do you think we should implement the new maps? If so when? (I know you probably don't want to do, so don't worry its not a labor request. -JCarriker June 29, 2005 03:01 (UTC)
2. I only have a ride on Tuesdays and Thursdays. (I am not yet able to drive due to the agist, sexist, and classist discrimination of auto insurance.) I'll go to Wiley when I can, I haven't forgotten.
3. Our little quagmire is still unsolved. Whether it be a redirect, rewrite, or disambig it needs to be done— even the demographics section is now at Western United States. I don't think anything I do will be accepted. I will offer my help with a rewrite, if that is what you decide, as not helping with such a project would obviously be unfair to you. Whatever you decide please do it soon, this is really stressing me out, especially having my hands tied from acting on it myself and not being able to move own with the project.

Thanks. Also see the politics article I wrote recently, if you have time, its, well— different. -JCarriker June 29, 2005 03:01 (UTC)

Responses to responses:
1. Not really the presumption I made, though I think you under estimate your contribution. I did make two other presumptions, that was that you weren't interested in reviewing the old maps and that I had already made my intetion in creating the maps known. My primary aim with the maps is to have cohesion across maps. The current collection is a grab bag of style, some good other terrible. There are also errors in some, Oklahoma is excluded from the Southwest map for example. The new maps standardize the style, replace the ancient Always, Sometimes, Rarely categories, (it was here before I was I just ran with it), and correct the errors.
3. The harm is we have a policy against duplicate articles, and I think encouraging its violation though inaction would be a mistake. While it is possible that it was a misinterpreation of policy, given its— as you said snide tone— and that edit history proves the article was created wiht the knowledged that the other existed, I am inclined to believe it was created as an alternative to the other article. In other words if "Billy Bob" doesn't like WikiProject Ethnic groups' standards at Hungarian people, but doesn't have the consensus to enforce his view— why not create an alternative at Magyar people with his view? After all the precendent at American West has already been established. That's the only legitimate reason and the only real reason it should be done. There is nothing wrong with duplicating information in articles so long as its about a different subject, I have no problem with rewriting the article to be about a more specific subject, I've even offered to help do it.
Also, I'm not getting the You have new messages notice anymore. Is it just me or do you have that problem to? -JCarriker June 29, 2005 08:32 (UTC)
I'd be more comfortable with the status quo, if this notice could be added at the top of the article directing new edits to the proper article. I've also responded to your posts on the politcs talk page. Thanks. -JCarriker June 30, 2005 04:46 (UTC)
I see your online now, what do you think of the notice compromise. -JCarriker July 1, 2005 06:16 (UTC)
I appreciate your help, though obviously I am disappointed. I understand this is not where your heart lies, however this is where my heart lies. As such I can't let it go— as long as it exists in its current form it is a challege to everything we are trying to achieve with the regions project. Indeed, in all likelyhood that was what it was meant to be. My mistakes were waiting so long to challege it and wording my first post on the talk page too strongly. This issue must be settled, anything we do with the project is irrelevant if someone can just create an alternate version of a page they don't like. As such I'm asking theresaknott to do something about the page once and for all. Again, I appreciate your assistance. Thanks. -JCarriker July 1, 2005 06:57 (UTC)
Theresa knott has advised me to file and rfc at User talk:Theresa knott#Another bothersome request, sorry. Unfortunately, without at least a peripherial participation by you, that would be pointless, and if I file without notifying you, you'd likley be dragged in anyway. As such I am requesting your opinion before I do. file it. My intention is to file an Rfc over the article, not indivduals. If you won't participate, I won't file, and move forward by making American West into a disambig. Thanks. -JCarriker July 3, 2005 09:56 (UTC)
I'm going to make one last effort to avoid an Rfc by making an appeal to CPret on his own talk page. The only thing I think, we disagree on is the "waste of time issue", with you thinking it is one, and me thinking it isn't. Am I right? We don't have to mimic each other, but I think we should have an understanding of each others positions before moving forward, so if there's something else please let me know so I can respond. I'll also write the Rfc in my sandbox and run it by you before filing. Maybe, hopefully, this can all be avoided. -JCarriker July 4, 2005 03:26 (UTC)
I just checked CPret's contributions he hasn't contributed anything since June 21. Do you think filing an Rfc, in which the primary representative of a viewpoint probably won't particpate in would be fair? If not, do you think I should go ahead with the disambig? If so I can do the same thing for it, I offered to do for the Rfc. Whatever, your opinion I'd appreciate it. - JCarriker July 5, 2005 17:33 (UTC)
I have put together my proposed Rfc at User:JCarriker/sandbox, for clarification, you have permission (as it's in my sandbox) to edit the proposed Rfc directly. Also, I was somewhat suprised about the Rfc procedure, I was under the impression that an rfc would be on a subpage rather than just listed on the Rfc page. If I precede with listing it there, will I be going about this properly? -JCarriker July 6, 2005 09:30 (UTC)


Thanks for pointing that out -- I fixed it now. - Nat Krause 29 June 2005 07:15 (UTC)

Talk:Left-Right politics

This is becoming intolerable. It has descended into the perennial "were the Nazis socialists?" question...sigh...I'm not sure any longer how to deal with that page. john k 30 June 2005 22:38 (UTC)


I found the answer to questions you posed on the corruption index page. Dosai 4 July 2005 15:38 (UTC)

Akwid move

Hiya, I moved that page for you after I saw it on requested moves. I'm not an admin so I guess the new mediawiki code was just having teething problems. :) Talrias (t | e | c) 4 July 2005 16:49 (UTC)

Sort, Luck & Lottery shop entry

Hi, the addition I made to the 'Sort' entry about the lotery shop in Catalunya was NOT intended to be any kind of self-promotion but was an example of something culturally interesting about the town (i.e. that the town is called "LUCK" and many believe believe it to be so). I am English, and was fortunate enough to teach English there back in 1995, so I thought I was adding something of interest to the wiki. I apologise if the content was innapropriate, that was my first wiki entry. Please feel free to drop the lottery reference :-D RJ.

  • Glad to know it wasn't spam. I'll try to come up with a more appropriate way to put the info in there. -- Jmabel | Talk July 5, 2005 15:15 (UTC)

Eastern Moldova

I appreaciate your "bluntness" but I have to ask you to pay attention to what I am actually saying. I said that it is undeniable that sometimes "eastern Moldova" can be used for " Bessarabia" or if you pay close attention to the article and historical facts, to what is actually central Bessarabia. This is because "southern Bessarabia" or Bugeac was actually the real Bessarabia, under Ottoman rule from 1484 to 1812. That Bassarabia or Bugeac only belonged to a Romanian state (Moldova actually) from 1392-1484 and was part of Greater Romania from 1918-1940. After 1484 though, it was annexed by the Turks and was part of the Ozi province, but informally known as Bessarabia( after Basarab I, a Valachian prince). This is the first time when the name Bessarabia is actually used and as I explained before, it only reffered to the Turkish sanjaks in what is modern day Bugeac. Moldova never controlled that territory aside from the period between 1392-1484. Turkey did. The Russians wanted to annex all land east of the Prut river and claimed that Bessarabia included in actuality not just the Bugeac but also Moldovan land east of that river.

Therefore, aside from the Bugeac, all land in the former Russian province of Bessarabia is nothing else but the eastern part of the principality of Moldova or eastern Moldova. That part of eastern moldova is also what corresponds roughly to the territory of the modern day Republic of Moldova. This is what I said was undeniable, not the politically correct part. In fact, if it makes you feel better I will erase that immediately.

I hope now, I finally clarified once and for all, the whole thing to you. If you still have questions or clarifications, I really think that something visual should help and that you should consult "Istoria Romanilor" by Giurascu( since you seem to understand a little Romanian and since that book has a very nice map of the region) or maybe you should take a look at these very nice maps which might clarify the whole thing:

If you look at the full maps for the years 1500,1600,1700,1800,1900,2000. you will see what I am talking about.

Domnu Goie 7 July 2005 01:27 (UTC)

White supremacy

I briefly visited the article and made some fairly superficial changes -- mostly copy editing kinds of things -- through only a portion of the piece. (The pathologies of white people bore me.) But the article is deeply flawed. I made some notes on the discussion page. Further, most black people I know wouldn't refer to white supremacy in the past tense; it still is a dominant ideology. Peace. deeceevoice 7 July 2005 08:55 (UTC)


I am away from home for a few weeks and only sporadically checking in. A quick thanks trying to keep Pablo Neruda more or less intact, ie [1]. For the life of me, I can't understand why that material was deleted and by whom. It seems like useful information, whatever one's political persuasion. -- Viajero | Talk 7 July 2005 16:17 (UTC)

People's war

Hello there!. I was wondering if you could help me to achieve a NPOV in these article. The main problem is a discussion about the size of Shining Path support in Peru. I have claimed that Sendero Luminoso's support is still on debate for peruvian society, but that it was eroded (if they have any) because of their tactics. Unfortunately, the only answer that I recieve (partly because of the influence of another wikipedist) was that they didn't care about what I have expresed (since they accused me of Fujimori's Propaganda), accused me of revisionist history and totally disregard my contribution. I wish that you could take a look at my contribution, and if possible, to support what I have to said. Thanks ! and any help could be welcomed. Messhermit 7 July 2005 23:02 (UTC)

Joe, for the record, that is a complete mischaracterization of my (and Viajero's) comments, a product of an argument through inneundo and otherwise untopical polemics. I encourage you to examine the contributions and discussion for yourself, especially the help in the fight. El_C 8 July 2005 00:02 (UTC)
It seems that the article is now much nore shaped and in a much more accurate and NPOV position. Thanks for the help :). Messhermit 8 July 2005 01:47 (UTC)
I withdraw from the article since Sam Spade, contrary to his apology, decided to follow me around so as to agitate me, personally. Please keep an eye on the article, and his edits, Joe. Thanks. El_C 8 July 2005 02:16 (UTC)

Brown v Board

I would appriciate a review and comment on the current status of Brown. I _think_ I've done enough damage for now (making the article 3x longer has to count.)

I am considering doing a similar if smaller job on Gebhart v. Belton, which is a MUCH harder case to characterize. If you have thoughts on it I would appriciate it. Rick Boatright 8 July 2005 03:24 (UTC)


Thanks for your answer at WP:RD about Qatar. I am grateful. PedanticallySpeaking July 8, 2005 20:45 (UTC)

survey about providing hungarian names for counties of Romania in Transylvania

hi Jmabel, pls look at the text of the Survey about providing the names of the counties of the Kingdom of Hungary as alternates for the names of the counties of Romania on Talk:Harghita. if this matter if of interest to you, offcourse -- Criztu 9 July 2005 15:39 (UTC)