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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
18,568,650 | `::Witkacy, it would be better if you refrained from saying ``all``, ``every`` or ``most`` in connection to statements about personal characteristics. This makes the article NPOV. I am sure that it may seem that Poles are dealt many criticisms about Anti-Semitism, but that is no different elsewhere in the world. Of course, the unique relationship between Christian Poles and Polish Jews is duly noted as causing your perception. Most people consider the Poles as superfriendly to Jews, but in fact the Polish commoners had no special like for Jews. These common misperceptions would be best cleared up, if you kept all terms neutral as possible. We don't need people getting upset and wanting to fight back and forth. Your own feelings about being discriminated against by inconsiderate Jews going on their rants about the Holocaust, don't belong in the focus of an article. You have every right to feel upset about the Blitzkrieg and Nazi occupation of your land, including your upset attitude in being slighted by the ignorance of foreigners who think that damage to your people was neglible or meaningless. It is their ignorance and apathy that keeps them from forgetting about your loss, but Poles don't shove guilt upon the world about the Holocaust as many Jews seem to do. Take it from me. I used to have many misconceptions about the Poles and Wikipedia has changed them. ` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,570,325 | ` It's your problem that you cannot file index encyclopaedically. That is standard procedure with all the bigwigs and is used for the back of all reference books. Be less hot on the trigger and more inclined to understand why things are the way they are. ``Otherwise, this is nothing more than bad faith stubborness on your part.`` That's what I could say about you, although general ignorance fits the bill you must pay. ` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | test | true |
18,570,501 | Do you understand, that this is about how people have accused you of trolling? | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,571,001 | , 11 July 2005 (UTC) ::::::::Zephram Stark, the little statement about Jayjg from BrandonYusufToropov is only indicative of him trying to show that Islam is peaceful and cooperative. His motivation for saying what he did, are of no actual relation to what is going on in Jayjg's edit history. 02:24 | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,571,858 | == Minor edits by need to be rewoven. == Sorry about rolling back...However, my edits are equally valid to yours. | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,572,416 | I fixed the mistake I made. | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,573,257 | You are not sorry one damned bit. You have yet to refute what I have written. All you do is pass the insults as if it were salt on the dinner table. This is on every article in which we disagree. If you have something useful and constructive to say, then don't be a harpy troll. | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,597,501 | ` ::PNRS, human. PNRS, human. PNRS>human. The only problem is that your analogy at this point no longer correlates to the real-world thing it was supposed to analogize. It isn't that we have detected PNRS's twice and found they were generated by humans, therefore the third PNRS we detect is probably human. Rather, the real world knowledge that we have around how life developed on Earth would describe an analogy that says we detected several PNRS's, and they all turned out to be generated by natural phenomenon. Somewhere in the ID article, it says that ID is not meant to replace (insert laundry list of evolutionary bits and pieces), and that those bits and pieces have already been shown scientifically to be part of a natural process. Those are PNRS's that were proven to be generated by an odd arrangement of pulsars, not alien lifeforms. The flagella on bacteria is just another PNRS in this analogy. And while we may not scientifically be able to explain them yet, we have several other complex PNRS's that we know were created naturally, so rather than leap to the conclusion that ``a designer created flagella``, science says ``no further information known``. There's a concept that feels like you aren't grasping here: science is patient in the face of an unknown. science deals with the unknown all the time. But just because something is unknown doesn't mean science finds it neccessary to leap to a conclusion or redefine itself. natural science has defined itself as empirical, observable, repeatable knowledge. And that's worked pretty good for the last couple of centuries, even though when the first natural scientists came about, they knew practically nothing, and everything was unknown from a rigorous, scientific point of view. If one were to look at ID from a purely scientific point of view and ignore all the political intent, ID is so impatient ``to know`` that it discards centuries of scientific practices to find some answer based on subjective measures like ``legitimate possibility`` or ``probable explanation``. Science is far too patient to give up so quickly in the face of an unknown natural phenomenon. ` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | test | false |
18,603,752 | ` == Rhobite is an admin?!?! == I know... it surprised me too. The following is an email I sent him. We'll see if he actually replies. Funny, you think an admin would have a cooler head. I feel admins should not flaunt their adminship. I don't know about you, but I want admins who can discuss things rationally before just blocking people willy-nilly. I will see you soon. :Umm... you shouldn't violate policy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy/Personal_attacks_%28old%29 :Calling User:Gabrielsimon a bad speller is hardly a personal attack. I feel i did step over the line by calling you a ``Homo,`` even though the link was to Homo sapien, and therefore valid. I do not feel I was over the line calling you ``Obnoxious and arrogant,`` because you call me basically the same. I don't see you blocking yourself. I encourage you to act like a grown up and respond to this message. Just ignoring it is rude and childish. Thank you Lord Voldemort` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | true |
18,606,002 | ===Thanks=== Thanks for archiving all that discussion from the Ashida Kim entry. That's half the battle, LOL Ashida Kim | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | dev | false |
18,606,380 | == GAY SEX, ANAL, ALL NIGHT == Why are you reverting me? SPUI saya on his talk page that he doesn't want modifications to his talk page reverted. Pull your head out of your ass. | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | test | true |
18,610,120 | ` == Rhobite a hypocrite? == Below is what wrote on a page discussing blocking ``personal attacks.`` Bold added for emphasis. :I'm slightly against removing personal attacks. There are too many instances of revert wars on talk pages. Also, people should not remove personal attacks that are directed against them - ask someone else. There are too many instances of people in a dispute editing each others' comments. Rhobite Is Rhobite a hypocrite? He warned me about a personal attack (which I admit I probably could have worded better). I removed it. I then probably crossed the line making a comment about him (I was just a little upset with him trying to muscle me... See above). He then removed those comments and blocked me for a reason which he never warned me. Hypocrite? I think so. ` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | test | true |
18,610,514 | ` - I'm currently interested in just the principles involved in the radio signal scenario... and what conclusions inductive reasoning leads to. I don't think it would be proper inductive reasoning to see a PNRS is caused by some intelligence, another PNRS is caused by intelligence, and to induce that the third PNRS is probably caused by some intelligence. There are unknown possible ways to generate a PNRS, and they cannot be ruled out simply because experience shows a couple other examples. This feels like the political approach to space shuttle launches about 10 years ago. Back in the day, designers speced the space shuttle to be safe for launch within a certain range of temperatures. Florida has uncooperative weather and often goes outside the safe range. Politicians wanted the shuttle to launch because it's good for elections. So, they pressure the upper management of NASA to launch outside the designed safe range. This happened a number of time without problem. At some point, management decided that the designers were wrong, and that a couple of launches outside their declared safe range meant that the real safe range was much wider. This continued for a few more launches until a space shuttle exploded on launch because it was too cold. If you shuffle a deck and pull 3 or 4 face cards in a row from the top of the deck, you can't really make any sort of probability measure as to what the next card will be. it could be a deck of only face cards. It could be many full decks. it could be a stacked deck. probabilities can't be determined off of a few rolls of the dice. two cases showing the PNRS was from an alien planet is not enough to make any sort of real probability estimate on the third PNRS. This is playing on a ``gut feeling`` that people have when they're playing roulette. casino's will post the last 20 rolls. Some gamblers will see these numbers and look for some sort of ``pattern`` and bet based off of that, on the ``gut feeling`` that the roullette wheel has some bias. They may even win a few times. But the casino is better off if the wheel is truly random, so any ``patterns`` is purely coincidental. ` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | dev | false |
18,615,100 | ` :Well, first, I find it rather strange (to put it midly) that you agree to discuss it in the TALK page (since I asked to let's discuss it first please) but you go ahead and do a revert anyway and call this ``revert campaign``. That aside, I left the note for the person who had reverted the article, but you responded on his/her behalf by saying ``fine, let's discuss it``. I find this also rather strange. Finally, I don't see mentioning Pilz is Jewish to be controversial at all. Iran's official response to this still unsubstantiated allegation has been that it is part of a Zionist media smear campaign. Therefore, how could you say that the fact the Pilz is Jewish is irrelevant? I see it as quite relevant. I also don't see why mentioning a Jewish person is Jewish should be viewed as controversial even in normal course of events and contexts. Really bizarre. ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | test | false |
18,620,240 | : Well then, delete it if you like, we'll find another wiki for it if you do. | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | train | false |
18,620,441 | ( http://www.freearchive.org/wiki2/index.php/Tape_editing to be precise ) | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | train | false |
18,622,928 | `STOP REVERTING THIS PAGE AND DELETE IT AS REQUESTED!! You are wasting my time and yours, rotating Admins to circumvent the 3 Revert Rule. I created the bio stub for Crapsey, which your collegeague ``FreplySpang`` incorrectly labeled a Copyvo. It was NOT there are only so many ways to summarize the salient points of anyone's life. However, the Copyvo label tainted the time and effort expended composing and formatting the page, so I want it withdrawn. If you want to create your own Crapsey bio, please do so, and I will edit your entry!` | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | train | false |
18,623,636 | But there are problems with the page, which a copy edit will iron out to some extent, so please allow me to do it, and discuss any edits you disagree with on talk, rather than reverting without reading them. What makes you think I haven't read them? | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | dev | false |
18,623,900 | ==Apology== Hi again - i just want to say sorry again and i hope you do a good job keeping the bolton page upto scratch | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,624,102 | Hi again; thanks for forgiving me i think the best thing to do is just edit a page if it needs imporving not to promot my websites. thanks and sorry again | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,624,254 | This article needs revisiondepicts the Viceroy rather too euphemictically, and underemphasizes the many negative effects his reforms had on indigenous Andeans. | 2,005 | false | article | random | train | false |
18,624,533 | == Rudraksha == Hai Sam, Thank you. Presently I don't know much about rudraksha but a little. I have heared that there were rudraksha seeds from one face up to sixteen faces. But I have seen only seeds with four, five and six faces. And I have also heared that seeds with one and sixteen face were rare and costly in the market.And if I come to know more about I will say you.- | 2,005 | false | user | random | train | false |
18,625,037 | ` ::mistakes like italicizing half of guardian ad litem, but not all of it. :Hey, if that's all you want to do, have at it. But what I read was seriously out of whack with the ``copyediting`` approach that you insist on describing. ` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,640,870 | ::::::::::::Thanks for the apology, Glenn, but it would have been much better if you said nothing to apologize for in the first place. | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | test | false |
18,641,079 | :I also forgot to remove the original text when I added the alternative version. Thanks for catching it. Cheers, - | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,641,721 | Not to my knowledge. They might be covered in a Pasugo article though, I'm not sure. | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,649,808 | FUCK YOU I WON'T DO WHAT YOU TELL ME!-ANON | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | dev | true |
18,651,650 | That's just a web site with no academic authority. Just because you are providing a link doesn't mean you can include any bullshit that you want in Wikipedia articles. Here is a link to Iranica's index, witth multiple entries on both Afghanistand and Aryana. Show me where it says Aryana or Ariana is or was in Afghanistan. I think encyclopedia Iranica with hundreds of scholars working on it, each a world authority in his/her respective area of experties, is a little more authoritative than a web site of the embassy of Afghanistan. | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,652,231 | `Also etymology of ``Khorasan`` doesn't mean ``Land of the sun`` it means ``The place [where] the sun comes from``. And only parts of today's Afghanistan where part of the old Khorasan province. Why do you insist on inclusion your misinformation when you are clueless on a subject? Besides, what are you trying to achieve by including this wrong information in this article? Who benefits from it and in what form? ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,661,716 | That's what he doesn't care to understand. He made a huge fuss, only to get his buddy to revert and make me break the 3RR. I hate this fucking shite they pull! He's painting me as the sort who would say that Hellenic Philistines and Arab Palestinians were/are the same. Since he maybe believes this, he could have presented it as an outright accusation. He chose to make it an edit war for control of the media content, so I doubt such sincerity. Then when out of steam, he got his Israelophile and likewise Jewish partner-in-crime Jayjg to cover him. This coordination of influence is remarked on my User Page. | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,662,356 | == ==Jewish Solidarity== == You know, you can quit with the threatening promises for my legitimate criticisms. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,663,165 | == Switzerland is Western European, not Central European! == LOL! John Calvin's society were all Western Europeans. How is Suisse distant from France? | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | dev | false |
18,667,987 | ` :: I agree that ``Keep, faggots`` was needlessly insulting, but it was in the edit summary, so reverting the edit doesn't help there, I don't know if you can even edit the summaries at all. Anyway, I think jackson's vote should be counted, so I will put it back one more time and if one of you reverts I'll leave it alone. ` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | true |
18,669,945 | `::First, I did not link it to idiot... I had it linked to moron, until you removed it. I then linked it to misspelling, and called him a horrible speller. Second, if someone is blocked, they can still edit their talk page... just not elsewhere. I will not apologize because I have done nothing wrong. and I are working on our problems, and we don't need you to help. Since I didn't put in the link to moron, you must have blocked me for the Homo thing. You gave me no warning for this, and there is no Wikipedia policy saying that you can block me for this. I understand ``No Personal Attacks,`` but feel you should have just told me to remove it, or removed it yourself, telling me it wasn't okay. By trying to muscle people with your admin powers, you are forcing good editors away from Wikipedia. Look at my edits... what makes you think I am a troublemaker? Gabrielsimon and I have had our differences, but seem to be getting along just fine without your help. I don't intend to start an RFC, because we all know how that will turn out (an admin versus a relative newbie... yeah that sounds like it could go my way). See ya in a few hours, cool kid. ` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | dev | true |
18,674,888 | ` maybe you could try and get your message across without all capitals and without swear words (or calling SlimVirgin a jerk and an asshole etc etc). Keeping it civil will give you a slightly better chance of getting your message across. I thought saying ``f**%!ng`` was at least a slight improvement over having all the letters. maybe not. ` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | test | false |
18,676,754 | = WHY AM I STILL BLOCKED??? = I should be able to edit now, but I can't. Why not??? | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,677,892 | ::Well thank you for your help. It seems to be working fine now. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,679,721 | :::I have no prior experience with VfDs except for GNAA which is obviously run differently, so I admit I don't really know how it works. ) | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | dev | false |
18,683,910 | ` :Is it scientific to attribute an event A, to cause B, where cause B was deliberate designed, with some sort of intelligent intent? Don't answer the questions beyond that ::Well, the problem with not answering beyond that is that your example is completely rigged. There are several major fundamental problems here. ::First, you completely fail to mention the fact that the intelligence behind ID is quite literally not of this earth. Natural science might look at a honeycomb, see it is built by bees, and then find an odd looking fossilized honeycomb, and theorize that it was made by odd looking bees. That is fundamentally different than saying it was made by something not of this earth. ID has at its core the notion that something OUTSIDE the system we can observe is at cause here. This is not science in any sense of the word, it is mythology. When Paul Bunyan was having a wrestling match with babe his blue ox, they kicked up so much dirt they created the great lakes. No evidence of paul and his ox remain. i mean, really. ::Second, natural science takes an approach to knowledge that nothing is known scientific law unless it is irrefutable. Theories must have heavy supporting empirical data to back it up. ID turns this on its head and does an end run around knowledge and plays games with ``probabilities``. If no one can say how flagella on bacteria could have formed naturally, how in the hell can ID proponents come up with any sort of mathematically accurate PROBABILITY of flagella naturally forming on bacteria? If you don't understand it, you can't do statistics on it. ID jumps right over that hurdle and takes anything that doesn't have a complete, detailed, natural explanation and jams in their own statistics that say ``well, it's so improbable for this to happen, that someone MUST have designed it``. This is such a perversion of science. You can assign probabilities to something you don't understand. ID is just making up their numbers. ::Finally, your example has A->B, where B was deliberate design. that's all well and good for a rigged example, except that with respect to life on earth, ``B`` is unknown. Your A->B example might qualify as forensic science, if ``A`` were a dead body and ``B`` were a bullet in the heart. You see a bunch of dead bodies with bullets through the heart, the next time you see a body with a bullet through the heart, you can probably figure that's what killed him. You don't have that with life on earth. You have ONE scenario, ``A``, and you have no other cases to observe or test. So, in that sense, A->B is not scientific if you've never actually observed ``B``. (btw, B is teh intelligent designer, which has NEVER been observed). So, in that sense, no, it isn't science. ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | test | false |
18,684,063 | ` ::::Thats what the clause ``standard uncontroversial object`` implied. Ok, we're getting somewhere. Now, as I understand it, it isn't under contest that finding a supernatural causation will always breach empiricism. If I'm wrong, please inform me. Second, for our ``standard uncontroversial object`` does specified complexity or irreducable complexity hold any water? Remember, just keeping in line with our inorganic, manmade, unimportant and uncontroversial device. ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | test | false |
18,684,316 | You hinted at it here | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | test | false |
18,686,360 | `:::I would like to say all books, and web entries, should have some relevant description of enough content, or no one would know what the books where about. A single paragraph description of the content is not the same as a lengthy review. I think the current book descriptions are ok. If some Jws are not happy, why don't they put some 'positive' books in the positive section as a balance? Reducing book descriptions until they are meaningless, or so vague that no one knows what they are about, is a rather surreptitious form of direct censorship, or reader manipulation at the least, and should not be encoraged. We all need to be honest about our motives for ``this or that`` change to any Wikepedia article. I also noted a lot of accusations about POV this and that, but if we feel something is POV, surely we have to put forth a good and specific argument against the information, before it is changed to something else. Simply saying, ``X is POV, therefore I will zap it`` cannot be good enough. One has to give a specific proven point, not a rhetorical claim, but a factual one that can be proven, or it all just ends up like anarchy, and stifles any real debate or reasonable conclusions to debates. 12th of July 2005 ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,688,889 | ` You *ARE* indeed clueless. Yes, ``Ariana`` is a different spelling for ``Aryana`` which does indeed come from the Avestan's ``Aryanem Vaejo`` (specifically, in Vandidad, Fargasht-e Yekom). But the ``Aria`` that you mention above is Greek for what is in Old Persian ``Haraiva`` which is modern Herat (Hari-Rud). Looks like you can't even read and understand a simple text in front of you. The Greek ``Aria`` has NOTHING TO DO with ``Arianem Vaejo``. Not even a single scholar has ever suggested that Arianem Vaejo is the same as ``Haraivo or the Greek ``Aria``. The Greek ``Aria`` for Avestan/Old Persian ``Haraivo`` is comparable to how in ancient greek text Hagmatana is written ``Ekbatana`` or many other examples. The Old Persian satapry Hari-Rud (which was not called Hari-Rud in Old Persian) is clearly mentioned in both Darius I's Behistun Inscription as well as two of Xerxes' inscriptions. ``Arianem Vaejo`` on the other hand, is mentioned in the Avesta where I told you above, and numerous scholars have published works on the whereabouts of it (including our own late Dr. Bahram Farahvashi who has a full book by that title, called ``Iran Vij``). Nobody (other than our great scholar ``Zereshk`` of course) thinks it is the same as Hari-Rud/Haraivo/greek ``Aria``. As for ``aberoo``, I honestly feel sad for you, because your beahviour and edits in Wikipedia clearly reveal that you suffer from an inferiority complex and nearly all your edits are about image and not about contents. It is obvious that you try to present an image instead of contributing to contents. I suspect this has to do with the fact that you live in USA (according to your user page) and they have probably called you a camel rider or something along those lines, so this has resulted in the sort of pathetic behaviour that we observe from you here. ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | dev | false |
18,692,184 | ` ::Indeed numerous Iranian media pointed that out right away. That is why I support the idea of including ``Jewish`` at the beginning of that sub-section of the article. It is not to ``single out`` Pilz because he is jewish per se, it is because both Iranian media as well as officials from Foreign Ministry have called it a part of the on-going Zionst smear campaign against Iran. Pilz' ``early anouncements``, had claimed that both final candidates of the Iranian presidency were mentioned in his ``extraordinarily reliable Agent D`` report. So no matter which candidate won, he would have smeared the winner. He had anticipiated that Rajsanjani wins (like most people expected) so he had initially put the focus more on Rafsanjani. As an Iranian, I also feel this is coordinated. It is indeed hard to explain how the major Western media would be so quick to report all those allegatoins (which so far have turned out to be false) without even a cursory investigation. How could for example, AP, Reuters and AFP all three make the same mistake at the same time? And it wasn't even on just one allegation, it was on multiple. So multiple News Agencies, making multiple mistakes that a pro would hardly ever do, all at the same time? And I have seen a pattern like this for years on numerous other anti-Iran smear reports. Also, you might notice how so many people involved in this very article are Jews or at least their edit history clearly shows their pro-Zionist stance. I don't think that is accidental either, they are voluntary ``contributors`` to the same smear campaign because they view Islamic Iran as a threat to Zionism. The same people also have an ``interest`` on the Rafsanjani article and probably many other Iran-related articles. ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,692,968 | so what wathiik? move it to the right section spelling is correct wether google agrees or not. gangsta rap makes the article look retarded. | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | train | false |
18,695,134 | ` um... ghetto speak stays in the ghetto. educated people pronounce the ``r``.` | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | dev | true |
18,695,381 | ` I find it just hilarious that a website that has an article dedicated to a topic such as this can't handle cussing. But hey, anything to divert attention away from the real issue. To me, the real issue is whether the article is made better or worse by an edit. And while SlimVirgin may have fixed a verb tense or two in his massive edit, the overall result, including the deletion of important embedded notes being replaced by unfounded questions of accuracy and urban legend, made the article far worse than it was. Several other problems have been listed as well. None of which, apparently are problems in SlimVirgin's mind. Apparently they all make the article better. What we have is one massive diversion here. The article was made worse. But SlimVirgin can't admit it. Instead he will divert attention by saying his change was simply ``copyediting``, that I and another editor are trying to ``own`` this page, that it all comes down to editors like me inserting unsourced edits, that I'm POV, and finally that I swear too much. SlimVirgin, you have acted as nothing but a victim of your circumstances. You have not taken responsibility for a SINGLE thing you have typed on the article or the talk page. It is ALWAYS someone else's fault. This is what I'll admit to doing: I admit I broke wikipedia's rules and swore on the talk page. I'm not particularly sorry about it, but I'll take down the language if people have that much of a problem with it. Every single other accusation you, SlimVirgin, have leveled against me is false. I have not violated NPOV on the article. I have not attempted to own the page. I mounted a personal attack by calling you an explitive, but I won't apologize since it was in direct response to you completely distorting my words into something I would never say. I would never say something as moronic as ``no dissent in the intro``. Yet I've noticed you have neither ``sourced your edit`` to show where you are quoting me, nor have you apologized for what would be a strawman attack. But hey, lets not talk about that. Let's focus on the bad words that FuelWagon used on the talk page. Whatever. ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,695,490 | (out of curiosity, does wikipedia: no personal attacks include strawman attacks and otherwise completely misquoting another editor? will have to look that one up.) | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,696,130 | (UTC) grow up, common usage is allowed. 20:42, 12 July 2005 | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | test | false |
18,697,596 | ===Blocked=== Last time I tried to leave a message asking for an update on my entry in your encyclopedia I received a page that said I had been blocked because I was not responsive to the trolls who keep asking the same useless questions over and over on the Discussion Archive of Ashida Kim. Answered them all many times and even showed the tricks they were using to assassinate my character. If I am still blocked, you won't receive this. Ashida Kim | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | dev | false |
18,698,803 | `quote== SlimVirgin wrote ``But I feel that FuelWagon and Duckecho are POV pushing too by insisting, for example, that no dissenting voice be heard in the intro.`` Although I told SlimVirgin I never said any such nonsense, he has to date not apologized for such a gross distortion of facts. ` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,699,469 | ==Ed Poor== Your user name or IP address has been blocked by Ed Poor. You can email Ed Poor or one of the other administrators to discuss the block. ok, click on email Ed Poor This user has not specified a valid e-mail address, or has chosen not to receive e-mail from other users. (swell) | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,699,658 | The benefits of adminship is never having to admit you're wrong and never having to say you're sorry. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | test | false |
18,700,644 | `Terri_Schiavo&diff;=18616024&oldid;=18601666 here]. in this one diff, he both denies it is a massive edit while saying it was a couple hours of editing. The list of issues with SlimVirgin's edits include the following: - regarding this diff: The embedded note that USED to be there said: < This paragraph is a direct quote from Dr. Bernat's testimony before the U.S. Senate in April 2005. Dr. Bernat's testimony was approved by the AAN Executive Committee. The two links provided document the testimony and the AAN approval.> SlimVirgin deleted this embedded note, and then inserts into the same paragraph, an embedded note questioning the accuracy of the quote. <Is this true? I seem to recall a case in England where a man woke up after a long time in PVS.><What levels of ``prognostic certainty``?: - ``During this time, the Schindlers allegedly encouraged Mr. Schiavo to get on with his life, and he introduced them to women he was dating.`` inserting the word ``allegedly`` might be technically not untrue, it casts a whole lot of doubt without any context. This statement about dating was reported by a guardian ad litem to the court. It is the guy's job to get the facts right, not present one pov. I can't recall, but I'm prety sure the guardian ad litem did not use the word ``allegedly`` in his report. and as far as I know, the Schindlers never challenged that statement at the time, either. Though I believe they may have challenged it much (years?) later, when they were willing to challenge anything possible. There's a URL right by that line with an embedded note saying < quoting from page 11 of 38 of Wolfson report >, in case anyone was wondering where the ``alleged`` statement came from. - The noise awoke Michael Schiavo, and he called 911 emergency services. <I'm deleting ``immediately`` wherever I find it, because it's journalese and usually unverifiable, not because I think it wasn't immediate.>`` Govorner Bush launched an investigation specifically into whether or not Michael called 911 ``immediately`` or whether there was foul play on his part. The DA recently dropped the investigation saying Michael's story was consistent and that the cause of Terri's collapse was probably cardiac arrest. - ``(PVS), according to seven neurologists who examined her, or a minimally conscious state (MCS), according to one other.`` The dissenting neurologist suggested ``therapies`` that the court dismissed as quackery. If this neurologist is included in the intro, then his diasnosis as MCS needs to include the fact that his therapies are questionable. - Before: In March 1994, guardian ad litem John H. Pecarek was appointed by the court to determine if there had been any abuse by Michael Schiavo. Pecarek's report found no evidence for any inappropriate actions, and indicated that Michael had been very attentive to his wife. <Do not remove Pecarek's statement. It is quoted in several court orders and GAL reports, however Pecarek's report is unavailable on the internet. > SlimVirgin's Edit: In March 1994, guardian ad litem John H. Pecarek was appointed by the court to determine whether there had been any abuse by Mr. Schiavo. Pecarek's report found no evidence of any inappropriate acts, and indicated that Mr. Schiavo had been attentive to his wife. <attentive? did he actually use this word?>Mr. Schiavo remained his wife's guardian.<Might it be worth explaining the sense in which he remained her guardian when there were court-appointed guardians?> an informative embedded note is deleted (the one saying the statement from Pecarek is QUOTED in several court orders but NOT available directly on the internet). And it is replaced by a question of accuracy ``Did he really use that word?`` - Before: Other neurologists — Drs. Jeffery M. Karp, James H. Barnhill, and Thomas H. Harrison — also examined Mrs. Schiavo over the years and made the same diagnosis; they also shared a very poor opinion about her chances for recovery. SlimVirgin Version: Other neurologists — Dr. Jeffery M. Karp, Dr. James H. Barnhill, and Dr. Thomas H. Harrison — also examined Schiavo over the years and made the same diagnosis, which entailed a poor prognosis. changed the emphasis on the second half of the sentence from ``all shared the opinion of poor chance for recovery`` to ``Terri's chances for recovery were poor``, but it's no longer clear that this is something that all the doctor's believed. ==SlimVirgin accusations== SlimVirgin [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | dev | false |
18,701,030 | `- SlimVirgin [wrote It appears that a small group of editors, currently consisting of and have taken ownership of this page and won't allow others to edit without their consent. This isn't allowed. This was in response to SlimVirgin's massive edit, discussed above with all its problems. I reverted his edit because of all teh problems listed above. And rather than admit it's a bad edit, he accuses me of ``taking ownership`` of the article. Fixing a bad edit === ownership???? No acknowledgement of this accusation being false, misplaced, or otherwise misdirected has been forthcoming. ` | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | dev | false |
18,701,473 | :Thanks to you for being reasonable. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,702,802 | == Help with Danish things == I am currently working on the Danish disapora of the Viking Age. Would you care to help me when I am stuck on parts of it, or need resources? | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | test | false |
18,707,605 | I just think hes a good actor after watchin the shining. i cant believe youve met him im green with envy. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | dev | false |
18,710,497 | The Jews who keep trolling this article are merely trying to cause a problem. If they weren't then why are they always together, Jewish and all on topics even just slightly related to Jews? Maybe they should learn to read Polish? God forbid that I would stick up for the little guy, whilst these jackasses won't stop their ganging up. I've already been threatened with a promise by for my legit criticisms of their hostility. TShilo and Jayjg are trolls and they should be banned, plain and simple. | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | true |
18,711,494 | ` ::Any time that you gang up on people you don't like, with other Jews as a ``collaborative effort``, you are violating NPOV and is Wikipedia:Gaming the system. You foment unrest and aggravation by your trolling. Your Ad hominem reverts are based on those who are not Jewish or your brand of Jewish. Don't be a hypocrite, because ypu're speculating on Witkacy's motives when you are suspected of harbouring ulterior motives yourself. You are hardly in a position to judge or guess. This apathetic way of dealing with everybody on Wikipedia is also a violation of WP:Civility and WP:POINT. Nobody carews about how tough you think you are and how much you can push people around. Everything you are doing in effect is breaking WP:NPA. The two pages on VFD are pushed because they only violate the will of certain Jews. ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,711,738 | Wikipedia:Dealing with disruptive or antisocial editors | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,712,308 | ` I found that you disregared my notice. DO NOT Revert to Copyvio on this page. You and others on this service seem to be motivated by misguided zealousness in ferreting out ``violations`` whether they exist or not. There is nothing to ``resolve`` on this article. LEAVE IT ALONE! ` | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | test | false |
18,715,270 | You're a nice guy Irishpunktom. It takes guts to speak against bullies. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,715,665 | == Random IP == Thanks for the reply. Was probably the IP. AOL generates a random one for each sign on. Must have hit the same sequence and caught his block, seem to be okay now. Thanks. Ashida Kim | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | test | false |
18,719,314 | ` :::Just to clear-up any confusion that might spring from the above discusions: the brand name is ``Doona``, and the name ``Doona`` is currently registered by the Tontine company. To me the above discussion could be interpreted as ``Feduna`` is the band name while ``doona`` is a slang term that evolved from it. I have never heard of the ``Feduna`` brand, and I don't know if the name ``Doona`` was taken from ``Feduna``, however ``Doona`` is itself a brand name current as at July 2005. ` | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,723,130 | ` ::Hi. As I said, I have observed that pattern for a number of years (almost on daily basis) about Iran, because naturally I pay attention to what (and how) Western media report on Iran. I do realize the business and ``sensationalization`` side of it all and I agree with you on that. But even taking that into account, still there is a clear orchestrated pattern. And again, do you think it is just a coincidence that a bunch of Jews with clear pro-Israel/pro-Zionism edit history, such as and (an admin) and others, are focused on Iran-related articles such as this one and are insistent on spreading lies or intentionally misinterpreting things and doing all sorts of evil towards a certain goal? ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,723,491 | `Ask yourself this: can an American TV anchorperson freely criticize Israel or freely speak his or her mind about US-Israeli policy without the fear of losing his or her job? I don't think so, because now we live in a world that your TV and news programmes are viewed all over the world, just like you can view programmes from so many other countries. In case of US politicians, the situation is even worse. I think it is funny to hear Americans claim to be ``land of the brave and the free`` even the American president cannot afford to speak his mind about Israel. The only good news is that many (if not most) American people are not quite well aware of this situation. ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,724,586 | ` Well, you claimed that ``Airiianem vaejo`` is the same as the ``Ariana`` that you claim to be Afghanistan. I provided you a link to Iranica and asked you to show me where I can find this in there. You failed to show me. I also provided you with academic information which I don't think you deny its correctness. I have also mention three of the Achaemenids inscriptions which clearly mention both the words ``Arya`` and the names of modern day Herat which are nothing alike. I have also given you the name of a highly respected scholar, Dr. Bahram Farahvashi, and the name of his book on this very subject. And you still revert to your bullshit on the account that an afghani web site says so?!! I see that you are really brilliant. As for your ``proud to be American`` how boring. Trust me, you are neither Iranian nor American. In Iran, we call you and your kind ``torke tablo``. I have a feeling you're well familiar with that term. ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,724,771 | :You are not welcome to write in my personal page. You are a loser who abuses his admin status in Wikipedia and people like you should not be given admin status. You and your few other Zionist accomplices have been hanging on Iran-related articles spreading lies, allegations and mischief. Your edit history shows to any observer where you come from and what this is all about. If you continue your abuse of Wikipedia, I will do everything that I can to bring the attention of fair-minded admins to your abuse. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | true |
18,726,202 | ==eZ80 Memory Address== :The eZ80 website and the wiki entry both state that it can access 16mb of memory directly. : | 2,005 | true | article | random | dev | false |
18,732,073 | ` == Ariana Airlines == Kindly educate yourself on a subject before you decide to contribute to it, or at least read the discussion area first. Your ``Ariana Airlines`` logic is embarrasing but entertaining.` | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | dev | false |
18,733,254 | ` of ``Aryanem Vaejo``` | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | train | false |
18,736,201 | I am a new user and do not have privileges yet. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,739,220 | ` ===LOL=== Look at all the time you have wasted demanding that I produce proof of YOUR accusations, LOL You're so good at ``tracking me down`` but you can't get in touch with any of these other people to verify what I say. Already told you there is no point showing you proof because you refuse to accept it and just use everything to carry on your ranting. Point is, no one cares about any of this. You are just a pseudo-intellectual bully who thinks he is clever. Ain't so, brother, LOL Ashida Kim` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | true |
18,764,088 | I am not guilty of these absurd allegations, leave me alone. | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | train | false |
18,764,566 | ` Hi again Bo [will just use the abbreviation for speed], Not much time at the moment since I'm in the midst of a project but wanted to respond to a few points. First of all, thanks for your kind, even-toned replies to my questions and expressions of irritation. I DO think that WikiP should have an avenue of complaint for users from my recent experience, it seems contributors can get stuck in an endless loop of Admins (or whatever titles you and your editorial colleagues have), never reaching someone with the authority to resolve complaints. You and others have referred vaguely to the ``process`` of Copyvio review, but I have no idea who does that, when they do it, or how to reach them to defend my position/claims. 1. I sometimes find a ``You have a message waiting`` notice. How is that genrated? Do you get this same notice when I post on your User page? Is there a way to send a messaage directly to you so it won't be visible to the world e.g. if I needed to provide you an email address or something I didn't want posted here? 2. Regarding Crapsey. I did indeed check various sources in writing the article. And if you read the EB citation and my piece, you'll see that mine is quite different, not at all a sentence-by-sentence paraphrase. It differs in style and wording from the outset to the end and contains far more detail than EB. Moreover, Crapsey is a local legend in Rochester, and I had no need to consult Brittanica I don't know how you folks access EB, but I stopped using it years ago when they went from a free to a pay service that only provides ``teaser`` articles that are virtually useless. Thus, the entry non-members get for Crapsey is the following truncated info: http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?tocId=9125441 We have never been EB ``trial`` members or subscribers; it would appear that you folks at WikiP do have some sort of membership, however. Is that correct? 3. Regarding Sock Puppetting, I was adapting your own WikiP term for those who use ``dummy`` accounts (or have friends act in concert with them) to insure they get the posting they want. It was beginning to appear that your colleagues were teaming up in a Revert War. In fact, they did just that in another article we posted about area poet William Heyen they kept Copyvio-ing it, though in fact it was written by us for our own journal, Exit Online. When I pointed this out, I was told, in effect, ``Oh yeah? Well, prove it!```` I have no idea what sort of ``proof`` one can offer for owning someone one has posted to their own web site (or any other web site for that matter). More to the point, THEY offered no suggestions as to how one might ``prove it.`` If you have an email address for someone at WikiP who oversees this sort of stuff, then let me know and we'll be happy to contact him/her. 4. As for ``my article,`` I was referring to the fact that it's mine by virtue of the fact that I authored it. In fact, your own guidelines specifically state that the author of each edit is the author and has only granted a GFDL license, so that author can be said to be the owner of that particular edit. That could even be the whole article. For this reason, the authors don't have to comply with the GFDL requirements for their own writing - the GFDL license doesn't override their own rights to use their own work. They can also license it to any number of others under any other licenses they choose, since that's one of the rights authors have. 5. Thanks for your candor over concerns about EB suits over copyright. Maybe EB has folks that spend their days doing nothing but monitor WikiP, though I somehow doubt it since they would not have access to the same ``new posting`` info that you and your colleagues use to monitor postings. It would take an army of staff even to randomly check WikiP listings. 6. As for creating an account, in fact, my colleagues and I do have accounts and would, indeed, like the ``credit`` for our efforts. However, given the recent unpleasant incidents we've encountered that include threats of being blocked/blacklisted, I'm sure you can understand why anonymity seems preferable for the moment. 7. I'll have to check into templates. I suspected you might be using some sort of boilerplate, and this is precisely why using forms can be so dangerous. ` | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | test | false |
18,766,583 | Please help with this page... it needs either a better translation or some major cleanup. I don't really know what to do. If there is a native speaker of French, that would really help us out. | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | dev | false |
18,766,627 | Management [people] changes as a resust of the Lockheed/Martin Merger | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | test | false |
18,771,926 | if a vandal keeps changing it, I would assume i have an exemption to fix it, i am sorry. I will not revert it anymore, just try alterations of the text. can you lock the article with the addition or ban the vandales? you sound like you have some sort of admin ability -steve | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | train | false |
18,776,788 | `8. Speaking of ``templates``, where does one find a complete list of ``comment codes`` such as {Copyvio}, {db}, etc. I've found pages that need revision but which I think need something more precise than the catchall {Cleanup}. ` | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | train | false |
18,790,805 | I once had a black ballcap and I put it in the washing machine. When I took it out, it was mangled and ruined. Someone suggested the thing to do is to use a dishwasher. | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,792,927 | ::It's sad that I couldn't get anyone to discuss this issue after waiting a month. You stalk me so you should have discussed it earlier. I personally believe the picture is real. It clearly is not photoshopped and Bill Clinton had several women (I only remember the last one's name) accussing him of sexual crimes. He even confessed his guilt to the American people on national television. Therefore the picture is real. Unless you can prove otherwise, you can abuse your admin powers all you want to control the edits, but I won't believe you. | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,796,221 | ` I agree that there should be some indication of Bach's significance stronger than that second sentence, as it is encyclopedic. I'm still not happy with the word ``greatest``, because it's vague - and as you say it's an abbreviation, I'd really much rather include a modification of your expansion of the abbreviation above (I may try one day when I've more time). I don't accept that ``everyone knows what it means`` - ``greatest`` means different things to different people, and there's too much of the peacock and the ``top ten`` about it. And Britannica doing something is by itself no reason for Wikipedia to follow suit. For now I modified the page according to this bit of NPOV policy. Hope it's acceptable. ♬ ` | 2,005 | true | user | random | test | false |
18,798,494 | ===Here You Go...=== Nope! Never accused you of calling me names. Just another one of your delusions. So, just to shut you up, here are the dates and proof of the Hayes Seminar infiltration that you don't believe happened. Just like the White House, this is the only documentation I am going to provide in a futile attempt to satisfy you. All the rest of your arguments and allegations are just as full of crap as you are. I can disprove them all. But, I'm tired of answering the same stupid questions over and over and wasting time with turkeys like you who REFUSE TO BELIEVE THE TRUTH even when it bites them on the bum, LOL Now, go check with your buddy Hayes, you claim to be able to do that, to confirm this and then come back here and apologize like the whipped dog you are. Don't wonder off the topic! You said this didn't happen and that I couldn't confirm it. Here is the proof that YOU are a liar. Ashida Kim | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | test | true |
18,802,807 | :e-mail you?!! hehe you're so cute when you take yourself so seriously. | 2,005 | true | user | blocked | train | false |
18,812,729 | METs and Cooper Points. Cooper gives quite extensive tables of the points worth of various activities in his 'New Aerobics' book. Came out in the early 70s I think, in time to be avidly read by baby-boomers' jogging-crazy years. My understanding was that the tables were based on Cooper's extensive measurements of VO2 (?). IIRC The tables show that the training worth of a mile at 6 minutes and a mile at 10minutes are significantly different (nearly a factor of two IIRC). Now in various places on the web you can find the worth of various activities expressed in Metabolic Equivalent aka METs. These tables seem to show that, once you've broken into a run at 5 to 6 mph, the higher metabolic rate of 6 minutes miling over 10 minute miling is nearly offset by the reduced time spent on the exercise - ie calories per mile is nearly independent of running speed. So what effect did Cooper measure to base his training tables on?? If we understand it, should we include it? | 2,005 | true | article | random | train | false |
18,816,818 | ` ``I'll let everyone know when I'm back online.`` My 40-hour block has expired. I am back online. ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,821,845 | :Stanselmdoc, we WERE in the process of whittling the 8 paragraphs for Michael and the 'tiny section' for the Schindlers down to nothing, and then, uh... other events, got in the way. If you go back a few days and check the history, we had been taking the very odd bits and pieces out of these two specific sections (Michael/Schindlers) and putting them into a more chronological order, sometimes giving them their own section, or in some cases deleting it because it was duplicate information. At the moment, I have zero motivation to work on this because of, uh, other events. I will probably pick up where I left off before other events delayed our work on those two pieces. It has nothing to do with NPOV or whatever other accusation you wish to make. We were working on those two specific sections when other events completely sidetracked the entire article. | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | test | false |
18,822,121 | ` ::I posted the intent to do this here. The 8 paragraphs of Michael and the ``tiny section`` for the Schindlers were under a section titled ``Family disputes``. If you read the last part of that diff, I mention taking the pieces out of ``family disputes`` and putting them in chronological order with the rest of the article. ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,823,061 | ` ::::``The side-tracking involved FuelWagon preventing someone from trying to improve the article.`` No personal attacks, please. I was blocked for swearing at you, not for preventing anyone from improving the article. ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | dev | false |
18,823,799 | :I think that new image looks gross, but I'm willing to let it be... I added the previous image below. I see no reason to remove it totally. It's a good picture, IMHO. | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | test | false |
18,823,983 | `::, would you mind clarifying something for me: what does a person's ``personal profession`` have to do with whether or not they are a Christian? Thanks. ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,824,339 | ` (UTC) ::That is very rich coming from you. Don't fucking call me ``pathetic``. 17:00, 14 July 2005` | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | test | true |
18,824,426 | == Heeeeey!!! P == :P P P P Hey! no fair picking on the computer scientist! RfC! RfC! Cabal! Cabal! D I can do research P I am doing it right now, working on some articles about Software engineering. I'll have to report you to the Ministry of Silly Walks next time you make such a derogatory term about computer science hehehe D PS speciation P | 2,005 | true | user | random | train | false |
18,824,635 | ` :, welcome. It's good to have you join us. Thanks for engaging in discussion before jumping into the fray. That being said, feel free to revise edits that are in violation of WP's NPOV policy are that are inaccurate. After all, this is ``Wikipedia, the free-content encyclopedia that anyone can edit.`` And ``anyone`` most certainly does! :If your uncertain about how to proceed, you may want to peruse the following References & Useful Links: ::* Tutorial ::* Policies and Guidelines. ::* Wikipedia:Neutral point of view ::* Manual of Style Again, welcome to Wikipedia! ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | train | false |
18,825,407 | :Yawn, retard. About half a million people use this IP, you can't do fuck all. | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | train | true |
18,830,782 | a Profit Charity Business Organization. Panic selling of peanuts ensue and brought about what is known as the Great Peanut Crisis | 2,005 | false | article | blocked | test | false |
18,830,793 | common sense. bite me. -steve | 2,005 | false | user | blocked | train | false |
18,834,234 | `::::Thanks for the explanations guys, maybe the coffee hadn't kicked in yet. When wrote ``profession`` I was thinking as in ``what kind of job`` the individual had. Duh! I'm feeling much better now. ` | 2,005 | true | article | blocked | dev | false |
18,835,368 | , 14 July 2005 (UTC) I have prepared texts for the Spis article supporting all my arguments (the text of the contract), but my computer got broken in the meantime, I could not find them anymore, so I forgot the article completely. What is your quick opinion on the mini-dispute? My Polish is not so good to read the whole article without problems. Could you tell me what it says and in in what part it says it? 19:42 | 2,005 | true | user | random | dev | 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.