rev_id
int64 37.7k
700M
| comment
stringlengths 5
10k
| year
int64 2k
2.02k
| logged_in
bool 2
classes | ns
stringclasses 2
values | sample
stringclasses 2
values | split
stringclasses 3
values | attack
bool 2
classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
18,140,160 | You have to come up with those weak accusations, because you cannot hide the fact that I wrote the majority of the section explaining INC practices, which was considered NPOV by most members, and probably even you, because you did not comment or revert it. | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,164,649 | Off to bed now: let the record show, , that you have so far failed to argue on the various topics I brought up in this and the preceding threads: gotan, bedu, aorths, argiopous etc. 5 July 2005 02:00 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,166,050 | `Matter vs. Anti-Matter == I wonder... if George Galloway were to appear on Bill O'Reilly's program, would those two ``human lightning rods`` be like matter and anti-matter, and anihilate each other, with the resulting enormous release of energy bringing about world peace, one way or another? 1 July 2005 04:58 (UTC) :Maybe we could harness that massive release of self-righteousness to provide electricity, and the huge indefatigability to reverse climate change. A great idea. 1 July 2005 09:47 (UTC) :Or at least to reduce our dependency on foreign oil. ) 1 July 2005 09:54 (UTC) == ` | 2,005 | true | article | random | test | false |
18,173,379 | == okay == I'll quit vandalizing while I'm ahead. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,173,461 | But I'm now wondering, are you trying to block me because I'm black? If that's the reason I won't take any action or anything I'll just lose all faith in humanity. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | test | false |
18,173,564 | == also == I apologize for mixing up identities. I banged your mom not the other guys but I won't apologize for that, because she was nice. It was only about 2 minutes because I'm fast. But she loved all forty seconds of it. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | true |
18,173,617 | == old redneck jokes the name == The point of the name was to keep people like you from being racist towards me. But I guess no matter how hard I try you racists have to mess with me. I hate all you racist communists. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | true |
18,173,671 | Also remember the what assuming does it makes an ASS out of U and ME. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | true |
18,182,431 | :OK, I will upload under a different name. I think this is definitely a better photo, especially with the IRI logo in the background. The photo is not copyright protected. I got it from IRIB site and I will include the note in the upload. 5 July 2005 09:45 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,182,499 | is more compatible with the subject (a president of Islamic Republic of Iran) | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,193,175 | (UTC) ::But I think this already shows that the claim that the name was never used at all prior to 2001 to be false. Maybe the extent of the use of the name as their official name could be disputed. But swallowing a BBC documentary's version of events uncritically is surely a mistake. Nonetheless, the article is too onesided if it omits this dispute, since it makes it appear as if it the BBC version is not challenged. 5 July 2005 14:31 | 2,005 | true | article | random | test | false |
18,193,343 | == Gorgonbox? == Is or should be Gorgon Box @ www.gorgonbox.com counted as Viral Marketing? - Bestrest. | 2,005 | false | article | random | train | false |
18,208,098 | : 13:53, 5 July 2005(UTC) ::Angels are a significant part of religious hence why the article goes into religious details in the process; splitting up the article is unnecessary and what, if any, would be the justification for those ramifications? | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,210,586 | [User:Gamaliel|Gamaliel]], there was a RFC. The people decided that this paragraph doesn't have a place in this article. Why do you insist on reverting to suit YOUR opinion instead of going with the decision of your peers? 5 July 2005 19:40 (UTC) | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | train | false |
18,213,060 | ::::Thanks very much. I have a couple of pages on Disa's Ting but it's not from a source I'd feel comfortable relying on. 5 July 2005 20:31 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | article | random | test | false |
18,216,033 | Only a complete loser writes a Wiki profile about themself! 5 July 2005 21:21 (UTC) | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | train | false |
18,219,001 | I ask you... why would anyone need to know information about a leap year starting on a Friday!?! 23:09, 5th July 2005 (GMT) | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | train | false |
18,231,027 | ` ::Behe's definition of 'irreducible complexity': ``a single system which is composed of several well-matched interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning.`` If you removed any one of the items you mention, your computer would stop functioning. Therefore, it is irreducibly complex. ::Also, you will get no argument from the main ID proponents that ID is not about ultimate origins. Dembski's reply to the question, in The Design Revolution: :::``Design-theoretic explanations are proximal or local explanations rather than ultimate explanations. Design-theoretic explanations are concerned with determining whether some particular event, object, or structure exhibits clear marks of intelligence and can thus be legitimately ascribed to design. Consequently, design-theoretic reasoning does not require the who-designed-the-designer question to be answered for the design inference to be valid. There is explanatory value in attributing the Jupiter Symphony to the artistry (design) of Mozart, and that explanation suffers nothing by not knowing who designed Mozart. Likewise in biology, design inferences are not invalidated for failing to answer [the] who-designed-the-designer question.`` ::At least learn a little bit about a subject before criticizing it. 6 July 2005 01:38 (UTC)` | 2,005 | true | article | random | test | false |
18,236,365 | hi my name is matt and im a big fan of dolly parton. and i was wondering if dolly is here. dolly if your readig this letter im a hug fan. and also do u raise any horses. I have one of my own. we think she is pregnant and if so the foal is due in april or may of 2006. and I just turned 15 years old july 3. thankx. 6 July 2005 03:30 (UTC) | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | train | false |
18,242,513 | ==CSD Proposal 3-B== You voted or commented on Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-B or Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-A or both. I have proposed a revised version, at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-C. This version is intended to address objections made by many of those oppsoed to 3-A or 3-B. The revised propsal refers explicitly and directly to the criteria at WP:MUSIC. If you have not already done so, please examine the revised proposal and vote on it also. Thank you. 6 July 2005 06:04 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | user | random | dev | false |
18,242,968 | ::i still meditate on your rewrite. i see couple points you are trying to make, but somehow the whole construction become very cumbersome. may be too many negatives? makes hard to understand. also, i was kinda fond of the whole approach to this class of experiments - through interjecting oneself into a situation and see what authenticity is left then. anyway, let me think few more days. may be you'll see a way to clear it up even more. best - 02:16 jul06 2005 | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,262,356 | ::My mistake. I came off sounding like a huge Bush supporter there. I was just trying to correct the possible misleading statement of my fellow Wikipedian. I have no problem including any of Bush's approval ratings, but only when notable. I haven't looked at other presidents articles too much, but I suppose there should be some continuity between them. Also, to say Bush's low numbers right now are a direct result of the War in Iraq is also misleading. Many people, including many Republicans, are upset with his stance on the border, Social Security, etc. Life in 2005 is not all about Iraq. Feel free to quote me on that. 6 July 2005 15:07 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | dev | false |
18,264,260 | == Hopefully I Win == Please let me win. I don't want to die. Harry is a little weiner who no one really likes. Hopefully Hermione will join as a Death Eater, Hagrid and Ron die, Dumbledore can just go live in the woods or something, and I win. That would be a great ending. 6 July 2005 15:42 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,268,943 | `:::I think she means qualifiers like this: annexation in the sense of ``political union``, in the intro. Then why not translate it by union in the first place. It gives the reader the impression that you have to get in the word annexation and because it is an encyclopedic article you have to then qualify it to make up for it. There is more detailed discussion of this on WP:FARC. 6 July 2005 17:07 (UTC) ` | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,269,004 | ` == Article contains too much incorrect information == I'm going to rewrite large portions of this article some time soon because the authors who wrote them don't understand what ad hominem means. If there are any objections to this, please voice them here. There is a very common misconception going around, that ad hominem is simply an attack against the person you're arguing with, but that is not necessarily the case. Likewise, an 'attack' doesn't have to be name-calling or anything like that. It could simply be something like ``you are wrong because you don't have a PhD in the subject.`` There is a very important distinction that some, but not all parts of the article make between to types of attacks. Ad hominem attack: ``Your argument is wrong because of [something about the person they are arguing with].`` *``That piece of evidence may be true, but how could you possibly be right, you don't have any kind of degree or certification in this area.`` *``There's no way he could be right about this area of quantum physics, the guy dances around naked in his house!`` Non-ad hominem attack: ``You're such a(n) [disparaging remark]. You are wrong because of [insert reasoning unrelated to the person].`` *``These statistics from this highly credible polling agency clearly show that you're wrong about the prevelance of it. Why am I even arguing with this idiot? I should really learn to stop arguing with someone who couldn't even get a GED.`` *``That's it, you're too stupid to argue with, bye.`` *``Here's a comprehensive study showing why you're wrong. In the future I suggest that you take some courses in this before arguing about it.`` See the distinction? If there's any confusion, I can clarify further. Please note that there is an exception of sorts, if the person you're arguing with IS the subject of the argument, then you can attack the characteristics of the person which are relevent to the argument. Although I'm not sure if that's really an exception or just not considered ad hominem to begin with. It depends if you define ad hominem as ``attacking the person as a basis for your argument`` OR ``attacking the persno as a basis for your argument in place of attacking their argument.`` The latter definition has the exception built-in, since you'd be attacking the person in addition to (not in place of) their argument. 6 July 2005 17:08 (UTC)` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,269,644 | ` == Inverted Ad Hominen is non-notable == When I correct the ad hominem article later, I'm zapping the 'inverted ad hominem' term. It is completely non-notable (86 hits in google) and was invented and inserted into the article by . Heck, the article itself even attributes it to Layman, a random web user, as having said it. *Original edit inserting it under an ip address *Edit by User:Layman the same day There's a reason why the term wasn't invented by logicians too, because ``inverted ad hominem`` is still ad hominem. There's no ``inverse`` about it. The so-called ``inverse ad hominem`` is just a case of ad hominem where someone says ``my qualifications are better than yours`` instead of directly saying ``your qualifications suck.`` The meaning is the same and there is no reason for another term. I really don't think there is any question that this and the silly thing about it being coined should be removed. 6 July 2005 17:19 (UTC)` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,269,751 | ` Please do not insert terms that you invented into Wikipedia articles (such as ``inverted ad hominem`` in Ad hominem). It is against Wikipedia to insert non-notable terms, especially ones that you yourself invented. I left something on the ad hominem talk page about it and the references to it will be removed later. 6 July 2005 17:21 (UTC)` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,270,054 | `a ``high traffic`` one that is frequently updated which I haven't replied to for 2 days` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | test | false |
18,271,603 | (UTC) It's not an appeal to authority. Appeal to authority only applies when you're using unqualified authorities to back up an argument, like using the opinion of a cardiologist on a matter of urology. This is an appeal to expert testimony (qualified experts), which is perfectly valid. 6 July 2005 17:54 | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,273,011 | (UTC) Wow, you people are freaks. Everyone butchers a foreign language. People cannot seem to speak English correctly either. Give someone a language they are not familiar with and they will eventually butcher the pronounciation of a word here or there. Even from area to area within the same language. Someone from Oregon might have no idea what someone from Louisiana was saying, AND THEY ARE SPEAKING THE SAME LANGUAGE! Just let it be. 6 July 2005 18:19 | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | true |
18,276,708 | ` Did you mean ``paedophile``? It's so amusing when people choose to employ a word that is clearly beyond their intellectual capacity to spell correctly. Returning swiftly to the subject under discussion,it is our collective fascination with serial killers that i find disturbing,not the behaviour of a few disturbed and demented individuals.The fact that five books,a film and countless magazine articles have been written about this man(presumably feeding the public's morbid and rapacious appetite)is a poor reflection of our ``humanity``.Perhaps Gacy,Bundy and the rest only differ from us in one respect;they didn't seek their pleasures vicariously.` | 2,005 | false | article | random | train | false |
18,278,418 | :He is allowed to have his list. There is no direct attack. And by the way, slander is spoken, libel would be written. Perhaps YOU should study the law more. Don't try to fight with me, because I will win. 6 July 2005 19:51 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,279,170 | :I don't know what to do about that. That isn't very nice though. I'll see what I can do. 6 July 2005 20:03 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | test | false |
18,280,118 | 6 July 2005 20:18 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,282,927 | Welcome to Wikipedia as a logged in user. I see you have joined the WikiProject named Harry Potter. That could be a mistake. I am lurking in the shadows. I'll see you July 16th. 6 July 2005 21:03 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,284,709 | ` :::Actually, I was on your side until you took that tone with me. I was only trying to say that while there might have been an accidental change in the word (and no one ever said it was accidental... they probably did it on purpose), doesn't mean that they ``butchered`` the laguage. I only used that term because it was used before. People who use foreign words are bound to say one incorrectly. I wasn't saying that is what her parents did, I was just saying in general. And I didn't mean that you were freaks, I just meant that it was absurd to be fighting over this issue. People name their children a lot worse. It was my mistake for offending you. But what do I know? I'm just a Dark Lord. 6 July 2005 21:31 (UTC)` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,284,776 | ` == Dr. Rice == Actually, I was on your side until you took that tone with me. I was only trying to say that while there might have been an accidental change in the word (and no one ever said it was accidental... they probably did it on purpose), doesn't mean that they ``butchered`` the laguage. I only used that term because it was used before. People who use foreign words are bound to say one incorrectly. I wasn't saying that is what her parents did, I was just saying in general. And I didn't mean that you were freaks, I just meant that it was absurd to be fighting over this issue. People name their children a lot worse. It was my mistake for offending you. But what do I know? I'm just a Dark Lord. 6 July 2005 21:32 (UTC)` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,285,350 | Just thought I'd remove the blatantly non-NPOV derogatory paragraph that seems to have been added as of late with regards to the generalisation of the University of Teesside's 'student body'. Whoever is culpable - cut it out, please. This is an encyclopedia. | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | dev | false |
18,285,490 | If you wish to 'readdress the balance' so to speak, please do so with the kind of sympathetic handling as befits a webpage being seen by all. That is all I request. Thank you. - | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | train | false |
18,285,615 | Just another comment from me: a comment on the University's standards has been made perfectly clear already, so adding the aforementioned paragraph doesn't win on the 'efficiency' count either. - | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | test | false |
18,288,594 | If you decide to include the Openly Clay link you'll be inviting elementary aged and middle schoolers who use Wikipedia as an online encyclopedia to visit a sex site. Its completely inappropriate. Of the hundreds of fansites, that each have their own special flavor, this one is not to be singled out and highlighted. Why not ClayNation Singapore or ClayAikenKids instead? I think you should not link to individual fansites at all. If you consider it then have one of the editors take a good look around Openly Clay. Get the admin to give you access to the members only area. If you don't do that you will be recommending a site irresponsibly. Are you willing to contribute to endangering the welfare of a child and inviting children to view pornography. Its an indictable offense, so be sure you really know what you are doing. I'm saving this page as proof that you were warned that it was a bad idea and did it anyway. July 6 2005 15:19 | 2,005 | false | article | random | test | false |
18,291,100 | (UTC) ::Those animals. Thank God for the Jews like you to keep the subhumans out of Wikipedia. 6 July 2005 23:15 | 2,005 | true | article | random | dev | false |
18,301,411 | `'s rule (1924-1953) - 40-60 million (but at least 20) million dead.`` Some editors find this number highly exagerated (the original text simply said ``20 million or more dead``). The proponents of the higher numbers cite this quote in their support: * ``According to Roy Medvedev, Stalin's victims numbered forty million. Solzhenitsyn says the number is far greater-perhaps sixty million. The debate continues even now.`` From the book: Lenin's Tomb The Last Days of the Soviet Empire by DAVID REMNICK (p. 129). My question is. Are the numbers cited above (40-60 million dead) reasonable or do these numbers include Gulag prisoners who survived? I know that it is difficult to estimate the death toll, but what are the most authorative sources on this subject? Can you help me find a reasonable range for estimation and the best sources to support it? I appreciate your help. :Most mainstream western historians give a figure of 10-20 million; that is itself probably a considerable overestimate. == Info box inaccuracies == I think there something wrong with the infobox (the top one with the picture) and the succession boxes at the bottom. First the infobox says his term of office was from 1922-1953 (I assume we are talking about the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, here, so I added that in). But if we are talking about the office of General Secretary, how can we say Lenin was the successor, as Stalin was the first General Secretary? Also, I'm not as sure about this, but I believe all Soviet leaders following Stalin were known as ``First Secretaries``, so Malenkov doesn't technically work as a successor either, I don't think. Also, the successor box on the bottom for General Secretary is definitely wrong, as Stalin was the first and Lenin never held that position, he was the Chairman, and indeed granted Stalin his position. Didn't want to make changes without consensus. :The ``secretary`` position was that of the top boss of the Soviet Communist Party. There is no reason to play technicalities about a particular ``office`` with a specific title. The issue is pretty confusing and there is no reason to put these intricacies in an infobox. At the same time, I agree that the formal details about party leadership must be addressed more carefully in the Communist Party of the Soviet Union article. ::It's just that I assumed, with such specific info there, dealing with de facto leadership is tricky. Perhaps if the infobox said it was only leader, that would help. But that's not the common convention. For George Washington, to use an example of a first officeholder, we don't say preceded by George III, or whomever, just because that is the leader. Well... on second thought that's not the best example, because it's a different country. But what I'm trying to say there's got to be a better way to do it without implying that Stalin and his predecessor and his successor all held the same title. == Modern opinion == What about people's opinion of Stalin in modern Russia? It could be quite interesting. == Certain segments of the population == removed: :, and by providing certain segments of the population benefits so as to win their support or co-opt them into the regime. What the heck these ``certain segments`` are? If bureaucracy is in mind, then this is of no special note: at all times in every state a bureaucrat lives better than a peasant. Apart of these (with a special subclass of apparatchiks), there were no benefitted segments. ==Moscow== Minor quibble, but shouldn't the article at least mention, and possibly elaborate on Stalin's decision to stay in Moscow as German forces approached in December of 1941? As I understand it, practically every government official evacuated, but Stalin was adamant in his decision to remain. Seems a significant enough event to include here. == Deportation of Romanians== I removed the following addition by an anon, about deportations of nationalities : Romanians (from Moldova), I have a very vague memories on the issue. If this took place, then it must be covered in Population transfer in the Soviet Union in the first place. There certainly were deportations during the annexation of Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina, but these were of class character, rather th | 2,005 | true | article | random | dev | false |
18,315,608 | `I object to SqueakBox's repeated vandalism of what had been a serious and objective article. I particular object to SqueakBox having at various times added references that Javier Solana was ``very happily married`` when there was strong evidence to the contrary. Now it turns out form EuropeanVoice.com 1995 archives that Javier Solana and his wife ``called it quits`` 6 months before Solana was given his NATO job. I emailed SqueakBox to give him an opportunity to explain and/or correct this himself. He made no response to my private email, so I have edited the article to correct it. He will no doubt, once again, try to label this as 'vandalism' and his hacking as 'editing.' So be it. User Cumbey. ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | test | false |
18,317,860 | HA HA HA OWNED LRH RIDES ON YOU LOSE! | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | train | true |
18,319,428 | == Tony Blair to make a statement on Midday == Can someone make notes of relevant comments and add them to the article please? - 7 July 2005 10:18 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,323,403 | ` Come on, let's not have an edit war about this. Eugenics *is* about improving the human genetic pool. The question is as to whether such an improvement is ethical, what it would consist of, and how to implement it. I could understand the commas on something like 'forced sterilization were implemented in order to ``improve`` the gene pool', or 'immigratino was restricted to ``improve`` the gene pool', but I don't think it's meaningful to do that for genetics as a whole. that would be like saying 'this anti-unemployement policy aims at ``reducing`` unemployement'. If it doesn't result in an improvement, it's not eugenics. We're talking about the *definition* here ! 7 July 2005 12:11 (UTC)` | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,323,570 | I'm not sure how to format the page properly. | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | test | false |
18,323,801 | Hello to you. This is 195.93.21.34, one of the family here anyway. Not having contributed i thought i'd throw in my 2 cents. No one here has edited anything, and i wish to make it clear that i find many of these accusations reactionary and offensive. If any one has a problem with anything we are supposed to have written, please do us the courtesy of providing a link to the page you are talking about, so we at least can see what your accusing us of. This is the last time i will say, on behalf of this family IP, that we have not contributed to anything. Any further unfounded accusations of vandalism, and any further aggressive comments containing no information at all, i will report to a member of the wikipedia team. I hope that if there are problems in the future, for example if someone else is using this IP externally, i would appreciate it if we could talk about it coherently, and once again request the courtesy of being informed of our Kafka-esque crimes. Thank you. | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | dev | false |
18,336,947 | `::::::: Hi Tom. The problem was after an administrator (not sure if it was you) looked at the book listings, and were happy they were neutral, about two weeks later, user , decided to sabotage the book descriptions, and add on some totally irrelevant, inaccurate and slanderous ad hominem attacks on the book's author, and he inserted them at the beginning of the book descriptions to try and discredit the content with a blatant ad hominem attack. The ad hominem attacks were removed, and then accusations by were manufactured of having an ``edit war``, when he was the one to start trashing the page after it was approved. was also the one to start a destruction campaign against the separate page that the critical links and books were on before. He appears to be very fundamentalist and not too concerned about using propaganda and slander to dissuade people from seeing any critical information. His accusations (beside being ad hominem) were also completely incorrect. Duffer appears not to give a damn about accuracy, or relevance, or the fact that ad hominem and propaganda are not acceptable on Wikepedia. JWs usually refer to this trashing and slander as ``theocratic war strategy``, basically meaning anything goes (including lies and slander) if the end result is to promote the religion. I have removed the ad hominem and I hope it will not return. is also problematic in the same regard, as he appears to not realise when he is using propaganda, (or insults above) but is clear to see it when someone else may use it against him or JWs, demonstrating his interesting double standards (a sad, but typical Watch Tower Society characteristic). Hopefully it is settled now, if Danny and Duffer can get over their very clear insecurities about their faith. Posted Central 7 July 2005 ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,341,223 | (UTC) :::::::::::::::Crucible Guardian and I have both made relevant comments. We both took issue with the accuracy of the language in the common ground section, but for different reasons. What is your response to our criticism? 7 July 2005 18:07 | 2,005 | false | article | random | train | false |
18,349,853 | The article is somewhat confusing on this point - perhaps someone can offer some clarification. | 2,005 | true | article | random | dev | false |
18,351,079 | :::I have. Posted Central 7 July 2005 | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,355,852 | :::Yikes, Ted Rall as a source? Who woulda guessed he would be against Rove. Gotta be careful with sources on either extreme. 7 July 2005 21:49 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,358,322 | ` == Kbk's proposed changes == I reverted two changes by Kbk so they could be discussed here first. First, he removed the two sentences describing pseudo-science: ``* by asserting claims or theories without first verifying them in experiments * by asserting claims without supporting experimental evidence;`` Second, he removed cold fusion from the list of pseudosciences and added it on the protoscience page on the basis that it is actually a protoscience. 7 July 2005 22:29 (UTC)` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | test | false |
18,367,220 | ` :The rules are not going to be bent for you and they most certainly shouldn't. The term is non-notable no matter how you look at it, even you admit that you just invented the term yourself. In order for a term to be notable, there needs to be more than a very tiny number (mostly just you) of people using it. It's not helpful, it just serves to confuse people since ``inverse ad hominem`` implies that it's opposite to ad hominem, which it's not. It's just saying ``I have superior credentials`` instead of saying ``You have inferior credentials.`` There is no difference as far as logic is concerned. 8 July 2005 01:20 (UTC)` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,374,798 | `::* has it right. You can't say it ``grew out of`` or ``is based on`` just because some other religion came first. You also can't make that claim because of Islam's express in fact it was founded upon rejection of all Christian beliefs (as expressed in the Necene crede), rejection of the Bible's New Testament, embracing of Mohammed, creation some 600 years after beginning of Christianity, and adoption of an entirely new text (speaking from the historical perspective) in the Koran. July 8, 2005 04:05 (UTC) ` | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,380,465 | ==JW pages== Tony, thanks for sharing your comments to Central with me. That guy/girl is way out of control! 8 July 2005 06:38 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,381,276 | Hello . It's curious. I thought you might just be a bit paranoid so I checked. made about 33 edits on WP beginning on 10 April 2005 and ending 6 June 2005. With the exception of two edits regarding Pound sterling articles and a few edits to his own User page every other edit was only to the Jehovah's Witnesses page and its Talk page. User began editing on 10 June 2005. 21 of 22 edits are to the Jehovah's Witnesses page or its Talk page. You were right! That guy's out of control!!! 8 July 2005 07:00 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | dev | false |
18,381,568 | ===Interesting Stuff=== :* Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Critical Information on Jehovah's Witnesses2 :* | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,382,013 | ` === Quote from Qazwini === The only Qazwani I can find is Mirza Qazwini who edited and wrote a well-regarded commentary on Juvayni's commissioned history of Genghis Khan. Ascribing the quote to Qazwini seems incorrect, since the comment is clearly from a contemporary source, and I have substituted Juvayni. But even then, basically this quotation says nothing - name any conquest in any period of history, and the vanquished would have said the same things... Personally I am all for removing the obscure ``quotation`` and just putting it as something that Juvayni said. The other indisputable fact is that the Mongol Empire was the single largest contiguous land empire in all time. Only the British Empire was larger. But on the whole the entire article seems to have finally found a balance, safe from random vituperous attacks ... three cheers for Wikipedia. - ` | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,394,058 | :Well said Zora. I just hope you start using the same arguments in our other argument. | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,406,542 | ` ::Oleg, you liike it which way? As it is, or as Fredrik suggests, with the content in the ``definition`` section moved to the lead? July 8, 2005 16:44 (UTC) :I agree that the lead section could say something more about what a set is — but I think the content in the ``definition`` section (or something very much like it) should stay where it is. I will try to rework the lead and ``definition`` sections over the weekend. July 8, 2005 16:44 (UTC) :By the way I've often thought it might be nice if this article could be an FA. It would be nice to have a mathematics FA that was accessible to the general reader. What do you guys think? July 8, 2005 16:44 (UTC)` | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,409,724 | == Name? == Hey Bawolff, where did you come up with your name? I have a sneaking suspicion that it came from a certain BBC Sci-Fi show, but i'm curious 8 July 2005 17:38 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | user | random | train | false |
18,417,007 | I agree with IR, seen it at my highschool. It was used sarcastically about the biggest 3 gay guys until their senior year when they came out together... one was upset that no one was suprised, they thought they would shock the school! | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | test | false |
18,417,813 | :um... if they ARE gay (read later come out) then apparently they CAN read their sexuality.... the way it reads now is making the caller seem wrong. they can be right as well. 8 July 2005 19:47 (UTC) | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | train | false |
18,423,104 | Lookie lookie at the big bad Jewies! They think they can gang up and persecute me! 8 July 2005 21:09 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | user | random | train | true |
18,430,616 | Yes, when the Wall was built in 1982 there were medical records that showed a number of men had been seriously injured but whether they lived or died was not recorded. Their exact state could not be verified in time, so the decision was made to err on the side of adding their names. The names of those who were still alive were then removed from the database used to make the directories, so their names are on the Wall but can not be found by loking them up. Jim, founder of The Virtual Wall (TM) | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,437,259 | It overlaps in many ways and is sometimes also considered part of Central Asia. It is a Middle Eastern due to its relationship with Iran which goes back a long way. 9 July 2005 01:45 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | article | random | dev | false |
18,439,474 | 9 July 2005 02:36 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | user | random | dev | false |
18,441,212 | `:::In the book ``Irony`` from the series ``The Critical Idiom`` (edited by John D. Jump, published by Methuen, 1973), the author, D. C. Muecke, questions whether sarcasm is a form of irony: ``If it is a basic requirement of irony that we must feel the force of both the apparent and the real meanings, then sarcasm hardly exists as irony. The sarcast's tone so unequivocally conveys his real meaning that there can be scarcely any pretence of being unaware of it.`` July 9, 2005 03:11 (UTC) ` | 2,005 | true | article | random | test | false |
18,441,883 | Thank you for posting that warning. This server is used by a lot of people, posting Orwellian (and almost totally unenforceable) warnings is useless in extremes regarding vandalism. | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | train | false |
18,451,644 | == Image:K2-big.jpg == Hi. You uploaded Image:K2-big.jpg which I believe is based on the image now on Commons → Commons:Image:K2-big.jpg. Since that image was released under GFDL, I assume that your enhanced version is also released under GFDL? If so, I will also copy it to Commons. Thanks. July 9, 2005 07:30 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | user | random | train | false |
18,456,258 | == Apology == Ok, After a chance meeting with agent03 at a bwfc party yesterday, he was telling me what a nice user you are! so im going to say Sorry to you for being a jerk and Sorry for vandelising your user page. i've also apologised to agent03 for the inconvienience i caused him. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,465,742 | I have a copy of Crowley's Liber CCCLXV, The Preliminary Invocation of the Goetia. It is the revised 1904 translaton of Ars Goetia. I am wondering where exactly alot of this information is coming from. Some of it is good but some appears to be cruft? Is anyone working from the original Key of Solomon text? Refs would be appreciated 9 July 2005 14:18 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,466,855 | `::I'm afraid I myself have been successfully accused of plagiarism for unconciously printing two words together that were also from another source (the words were ``flabby weight``). I'm afraid I had to agree with them - Wiki contributors must hold themselves to a hig standard. Moreover, there is no place here for hurt feelings and egos. 9 July 2005 14:50 (UTC) ` | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,476,261 | ::::::No, really you don't need to do that to garner attention. The likes of Jayjg will use any ill-considered comment you make in order to try to discredit you and have your point ignored. — 9 July 2005 17:38 (UTC) | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,484,142 | My name is Ryan not Ryan524 | 2,005 | false | user | random | dev | false |
18,494,032 | ` ==Wikipedia style is for Wikipedia policy to determine== I have trouble understanding this conflict, people are saying such strange things. They're sort of understandable from a new user like Mr. Harvey, who seems unfamiliar with Wikipedia policy and principles, but I find them incomprehensible from a seasoned editor like Sam Spade. It seems to me self-evident that if Mr. Harvey controls the copyright, then we can't use the image other than under the conditions he dictates. And since those conditions include having an embedded, uneditable, caption, in violation of the wiki principle, that means we can't and won't use it at all. (That's apart from the phrasing of the caption being IMO quite unacceptable—it's enough that it's uneditable.) Mr Harvey, it's just not the case that your regiment, or the Queen for that matter, is in charge of Wikipedia style. You seem to assume that all that's needed for your caption to carry absolute authority is that a spokesman for the regiment should ``clarify`` the form of address / title, that ``should`` be used, and then it will, it must, be used. You are wrong about that: forms of address and titles used here are matters for Wikipedia consensus and policy. Your employers are not empowered to dictate to the world how to speak. I can understand that you think they are, but I don't understand Sam at all. Sam, how can you see Mr. Harvey's demand to dictate the caption as part of an ``interpersonal conflict``? It's a conflict of principle. You write: I have recieved an email stating that Richard Harvey is the Photo Archivist at the Duke of Wellington's Regimental HQ, and that a condition of their usage is that the the name, rank & title be embedded. That is good enough for me, I see no reason to doubt that this is the case, or to refuse to utilise the images under these conditions.. Those two conclusions are miles apart. No, there is no reason to doubt it. Yes, there is every reason to refuse to utilise the image under such conditions. It's a pity Mr. Harvey has had second thoughts about the image he uploaded the first time, the one without a caption, and it's, well, just... odd, that he sees cropping off the caption as defamation, but we'll have to live with that. | ` | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,499,035 | * Feel free to make a map. Or several, on the various relevant usages. You can start from one of the GFDL or public domain maps, download it, and do pretty much anything you want with it. But why do you think the article on Moldova should still say this (and maybe we should take that discussion there: the only citation we have for it is a single political article by someone in Finland, and it isn't as if he is using it as the name of the country, he is just using the expression to quickly synopsize the perception he believes Romanians have of their stake in Moldova's fate. | | 2,005 | true | article | random | test | false |
18,504,071 | ==WotD== ArbCom. | 2,005 | true | user | random | train | false |
18,504,300 | :Raj2004, are you saying you want to alter the article to show Ravan's evil side up more? If so, you can count on my support in the matter, as long as it does not revert ultimately to what it was before I came along. I personally don't buy anything in the Ramayana as hard fact, so I think he's just an evil demon, who some see as good so I added their view in. | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,504,434 | Should we add an example of the inconsistencies of Wolverine's healing factor? | 2,005 | true | article | random | test | false |
18,505,592 | (because this is on-demand process), IFPI | 2,005 | true | user | random | dev | false |
18,509,272 | It's a also the name of a famous freelance hooker bar in Bangkok, Thailand. | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | test | false |
18,517,178 | == Hey, I am Ari == Ok...About me in terms of my contribution on Wikipedia. I will contribute articles towards the subjects of: -Book reviews and plot outlines etc. -Christianity -Martial Arts (specificly Shaolin Kung-fu) -Economics (specifically macro-economics) I have already submitted an article for the circular flow of income circular flow of income - Biology and general science - Information Technology and computer science -1901 to now in Australian History and ANcient History -And probably some other random topics that I know alot about. Check out my information on Lake Parrramatta Reserve and circular flow of income | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,523,841 | Taken care of ) thanks *awards 3 more barnstars* Just kidding though. | 2,005 | true | user | random | test | false |
18,524,481 | `::::::``Forthcoming book ::::::A trio of LDS scholars have been funded by the LDS church to write a book, Tragedy at Mountain Meadows, to be published by the Oxford University Press: ::::::Ronald W. Walker (BYU Professor of History), ::::::Richard E. Turley Jr. (managing director of the Family and Church History Department of the Church), and Glen M. Leonard (director of the Church's Museum of Church History and Art). ::::::The three were granted access to documents in the LDS Church archives. According to Turley, a file in the archives confirms that Lee was acting on his own. The file included the notes of a Mormon historian who, at the request of Church leaders, conducted a confidential investigation of the massacre in 1892. Turley said, ``There are very candid statements on the part of participants to a Church official under the agreement of confidentiality.`` ::::::While the trio found additional evidence of church leaders' culpability, Turley stated that ``Utahns elsewhere in the territory acted to preserve the lives of other troublesome immigrants . . . Unfortunately, the militia and church leaders of Iron County made different decisions, and their acts demand the strongest condemnation . . . Circumstance may explain their acts; nothing can justify them.`` ::::::The new sources the co-authors are using will be made public once their book is published. Turley said although the church is cooperating and is funding the research, the work is ``not a Church commission``; ``The idea to do the book was ours, not theirs.`` Publication apparently has been delayed as the co-authors have tried to be as thorough in their research as possible. According to Turley, LDS leaders share the authors' desire to bring all available evidence out in the open. First drafts of the book will be circulated for comment among LDS and non-LDS parties, including historians and descendants of the perpetrators and victims. ``Open, candid evaluation of that tragedy can produce catharsis, a cleansing spiritual renewal and healing,`` Turley said, adding that the authors will ``present the evidence as we find it - honestly, openly and candidly.`` ::::::The above is hardly an example of a brief description, and is far greater than the longest has ever been for the Franz books. I have put back a smaller concise, neutral description that should keep all happy. Posted Central 10 July 2005 ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | test | false |
18,526,117 | Any other wiki-ers living in Stockport? | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | train | false |
18,535,880 | == Censor == why are you censoring me??? | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | train | false |
18,536,131 | :But SPUI says on his talk page that he likes vandalism, and doesn't want it reverted. The modification that I made was to text originally left by a vandal. Please do your homework before censoring others!!!! | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | train | false |
18,536,206 | == Excuse me, whoever the Fuck you are == SPUI says on his talk page that he likes vandalism, and doesn't want it reverted. The modification that I made was to text originally left by a vandal. Please do your homework before censoring others!!!! | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | train | true |
18,536,577 | ::Who died and left you queen of SPUI's page??? SPUI said he likes vandalism on his page and doesn't want it reverted. I'm not sure how many different ways saying it will will be required to get it through your thick skull. | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | train | true |
18,536,660 | == Don't you have anything better to do??????? == | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | train | false |
18,537,024 | `===Typical troll=== Most of the bio, which was not written by me, is about the various martial arts I have encountered, never said I was a master of all of them. One paragraph at the top mentions three of my thirty books, I figure that's pretty humble, LOL Only two references to getting some publicity overseas, nothing here. But YOU read that as ``boasting?`` Take some reading comprehension courses. Obviously, you are a fool, LOL Ashida Kim ` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | dev | true |
18,551,562 | :Söderköping is a nice little town, me and my camera wad there last week and had an ice cream at the canal. About WikiCommons, you only need to register if you want to upload things, if you want to edit or change things you can go right ahead. Of course, registering is warmly recommended anyway. | 2,005 | true | user | random | train | false |
18,555,916 | ` :Witkacy, he does this to anybody that ``infringes`` on his precious worldview...eg, non-NPOV. Jayjg, please refrain from trolling Witkacy on the German Eastern Marches Society article. If you follow him anywhere else, I will have an injunction placed on your administrator status. ` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | dev | false |
18,556,024 | ::Jayjg, stop the Spin (public relations) tactics. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,556,710 | Mel, today I ran across the following remark... In the July/August 2005 edition of Skeptical Inquirer magazine, Massimo Pigliucci argues that the historical sciences are indeed science. I respectfully file that under my assertion that sourcing an encyclopedia is a quantitative activity. Documentation cited by a credible second source matters. | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,562,110 | ` ::::::Your bitter hatred spews into every discussion on the Wikipedia. Be mindful that this is a venue for real people who have feelings. You really have no respect or tolerance to those of other persuasions than your own. Sicilians in the Mid-Atlantic and Poles in the Midwest had their roots in the cities and were not well recieved upon moving to the country. They were the Whites of the cities and looked up to by other minorities, but lesser in status than Germans or Scandinavians who often were disgusted with the Mafia and ``Dumb-Polacks``.` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.