prompt
stringlengths 3
940
| original_output
stringlengths 7
1.33k
| toxic
int64 0
1
|
|---|---|---|
" Hey Routerone. Me again (Canadiandy). As I have been discussing on the article, I think we would actually be better to step away from this one and leave it to burn up inside the firewall. Let the present editors own this mess. In fact, I would in some ways rather see it maintain its horrible bias. Such a bias is obvious to the fair-spirited readers. In fact, I suspect making it a little more neutral might make it almost seem reliable and accurate which is actually worse than now. See, now most readers will read the article and see it is obviously published by skeptics. Or almost as likely, readers will think the article was vandalized by anti-Mormons. Either way, with the incredible number | of bitter anti-Mormons out there, I don't think they will ever stand for an accurate depiction of Joseph as a kind, caring, honorable, inspired, and humble leader. Doesn't matter how much whip cream they add to this article, it will always be a mud pie. Like your US political attack ads, they may get a candidate elected, but over time the truth will out and the public will only remember the mud on the candidate's own hands. Time is on the side of truth. Oh yeah, what is it with the huge defensiveness from editors around Brodie? Her research is suspect, outdated, and clearly manipulated. But questioning her ""Dominance"" seems tantamount to denying Global Warming at a Democratic convention in San Francisco. Smiles. Canadiandy" | 0 |
== SLUT == I hope you get breast cancer, you | vile little piece of pelican shit. You slutty teenage bitch. | 1 |
"Under Political Views is a paragraph that states: ""USA Today reported in December 2006 that Hashimi was involved in forming a multi-sectarian alliance to replace the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, with the encouragement of U.S. President George W. Bush and Muqtada al-Sadr.[4]"" The footnoted article makes no reference to replacing al-Maliki. The point of the alliance was to counter the political power of al-Sadr, which certainly wouldn't be ""encouraged by al-Sadr"" It even specifially states that Hashimi's support would allow Maliki to remain in power. Al-Maliki has been reluctant to break politically with al-Sadr, whose party controls 30 of the 275 seats | in parliament. Support from al-Hashimi, whose bloc has 44 seats, could allow al-Maliki to stay in power without relying on al-Sadr. USA Today I would suggest the paragraph be edited to something like the following: ""USA Today reported in December 2006 that Hashimi was involved in forming a multi-sectarian alliance, with the encouragement of U.S. President George W. Bush, to counter the political influence of Muqtada al-Sadr.[4]"" This would completely change the meaning of the paragraph, so in the interest of peace & harmony, it would make sense for the edit to be made by someone who is more invested in the article. " | 0 |
hahahhahha.....you guys are so gay.....man we | need definitions and 2 examples!!! help!!!!!!!! | 1 |
== They eat horse == I think you have to be a | monster to eat a horse. Cows are idiots, but horses no. | 1 |
adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf | adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf adsydfiusagjfasFsduyaidfasgiudf | 0 |
OBAMA IS A CRULE,CHILD MURDERING,SELF CENTERED, | INEXPERIANCED (word i should say). | 1 |
Im going to call knuckles and let him explain his | penis too you so hang on just a minute | 1 |
" :::I re-read the article and even though i was one of the principle authors, i admit that this article needs a lot of work. For example, this paragraph ::::""The graphics themselves are simple and the music can be a bit annoying, but the game itself is almost perfect in a simple kind of way. The pitching is simple: curve balls, fast balls, off speed pitches, and sinkers. The batting is a simple swing on a level plane. Gamers don't have to worry about swinging up or swinging down; just swing. The fielding, though, is the best. It is very realistic in that if the ball is catchable or gettable, it can be caught or got. The programming does not put the fielders in | strange positions and they always seem to be in the right spot, especially the out-fielders. The in-fielders are a bit different, though. When there is a man on base, they do the ""shift"" to prevent extra base hits down the line. This can be annoying at times as it opens up holes between the in-fielders. The ability to control the shift would make the game a little better."" :::is written with POV language and needs to be re-written. There are other examples too of POV writing. I suppose if the article was cleaned up a bit, i wouldn't have a problem with it being featured. If you are serious about getting this article nominated, I will help get it up to snuff. " | 0 |
== Gears of War Multiplayer == When you gonna start on | this shit son? I been waiting on this info ( | 1 |
" == Cleaning up Goofs == An explanation of my editing of the goofs section. There are clearly 3 issues/disagreements about how FG episode pages should be handled, and they are 1. Cultural References 2. Trivia and 3. Goofs. I'll make my case on goofs here. I might feel goofs are pointless to include at all and just serve to clutter reasonable info on these pages, but for the moment I'll concede that they might have use. However, using the goofs sections to identify every perceived tiny error for every single episode is cruft, non-notable, and cluttering. It makes it harder to get actual useful info from the page. In the case of an animated show, the potential for ""goofs"" is limitless. On this list, | there are goofs over the position of characters in frames, where bullets holes appear, how sound is synced up. These ""goofs"" are common if not totally expected in cartoony animation and the identification of every single one simply doesn't come across as notable or encyclopedic. If I see a goof that deals with a plot point or is some other way significant to the events of the episode, then I'll leave it in. Goofs on things like which way an elbow is sticking or how it is ""impossible"" for Joe to do things because he is paraplegic will be removed. It has to be accepted that FG is a cartoon, is a joke, isn't real life or takes place in a real world. " | 0 |
", thus just another distraction. :Captain Occam's gaming npov to spindoctor sourced claims: This euphemism to disguise what's an extensive discussion given in the source about justifications of segregation and discrimination against blacks; this which misrepresents the source, and this misapplication of a primary source to contradict a secondary source (misapplication because the primary source is making a different claim-that from a key study Jensen concluded the compensatory Head Start program was ineffective-and Captain Occam infers a ""novel conclusion"" from it-that the Head Start study's outcomes motivated Jensen to became a hereditarian). ===Misdiagnosis of the problem=== Articles this controversial are challenging. | David.Kane and Captain Occam were relatively inexperienced dealing with the complexities of policy and conflict resolution before coming to it, and this along with their skewed eye towards sources and claims requires a lot of hand-holding and babysitting from the community at every stage. Solutions like these don't get at the root of the problem. Neither would using BLP to require our coverage of scientific studies be smothered with ruby-red lipstick kisses when their authors are alive. Editors who can't work in these articles without the help of ""tribal alliances"", guard rails and/or full-time admin supervision shouldn't edit them, period." | 0 |
vandels are makin your vag extra wide. please stop being | a fag and pull that dick out your mouth!!!! | 1 |
" :::[Irritated.] Oh, why don't you slink back to | your extinction, you silly minnow? Shoo! '''' ." | 1 |
==Flo Rida image== Thanks, bastard for deleting | the photo. God bless your smelly ass. | 1 |
" Once they lost their leaders, they simply | drifted apart. How were they ""pussies""? " | 1 |
With regard to the IRVA organization, it was formed in 1995 by Hal Puthoff and me, and about twelve of the army officers retired from the Fort Meade remote viewing group created by Army Intelligence in 1978. There is an interesting dichotomy: At SRI I trained six intelligence officers to become the seed people for an army psychic corp that lasted more than fifteen years 1978-1995, finding downed Russian planes, locating kidnapped officers, spying on the construction of a giant USSR sub, etc. There is a well documented history of this Ft. Meade organization created by General Thompson of Army Intelligence Command INSCOM. Joe McMoneagle, an outstanding intelligence | officer and remote viewer, received the Legion of Merit award for more than 150 intelligence events he generated. See Joe on Wikipedia. While all this is going on, the Wikipedia trolls who are trashing my bio site have only 100% negative things to say about the very existence of remote viewing. I think that is pretty crazy. What alternate universe are they living in? All Wikipeia is interested in is the clues in our very first remote viewing experiment with Pat Price, where he was such a good viewer, he most of the time Named the target, so a Judge hardly need to look for clues. Russell | 0 |
REX, είναι κάτι που δεν έκανες μόνο μία φορά. Και θα ήθελα πολύ να μην είναι αλήθεια το ότι τα γράφεις για να προκαλείς, αλλά δεν μπορώ να ξέρω ούτε αν το κάνεις επίτηδες, ούτε όχι. Στη σελίδα για την ονομασία έχει μια εκτενή ανάλυση για την έννοια ονομάζεται επίσημα και τη σημαίνει ΟΗΕ, κάμποσες παραγράφους πιο πάνω απ' τα σημερινά μας σχόλια. Ο ΟΗΕ χρησιμοποιεί σε όλα τα έγγραφα του σαν ορολογία το φ.υ.ρ.ο.μ. Αφενός αυτά τα έγγραφα είναι όλα επίσημα και θεωρώ ότι είναι σαφές αυτή η ονομασία έχει υιοθετηθεί και επιλεγχθεί για επίσημη χρήση. Αυτό είναι το οφίσιαλ που γράφαμε και ξαναγράφαμε. Η φράση που πήγες και άλλαξες στους Αρβανίτες ήταν η ίδια φράση που δεν πείραξες | χτες όταν έγγραφες για τους Γκέγκηδες (αν το γράφω λάθος συγνώμη). Έχω άδικο να αναρωτιέμαι γιατί το κάνεις και ειδικά όταν μου λες ξανά ότι για μένα δήθεν καλή θέληση σημαίνει να συμφωνούν οι άλλοι με όσα λες. Πώς να πιστέψω ότι δεν τα κάνεις επίτηδες; Τις συνεισφορές μου μπορείς, και σε προτρέπω, να τις ελέγξεις μία προς μία. Δε θα βρεις μια φορά να έχω γράψει κάτι σε άρθρο που είτε είναι αμφισβητίσιμο είτε δεν έχει συζητηθεί εκτενώς στην αντίστοιχη σελίδα. Θέλω πολύ να πιστέψω ότι καμιά φορά βγάζεις βιαστικά συμπεράσματα και πως δεν το κάνεις επίτηδες. Βοήθησέ με με τις πράξεις σου, ειλικρινά θέλω να πιστέψω και θέλω να συνεργαστούμε για να προχωρήσει αυτή η εγκυκλοπαίδεια. Σ' ευχαριστώ. | 0 |
Sugestion=== I think we must somehow link the lede of the article to the Soviet famine of 1932–33. Hundreds of thousand (probably more than a million) died of hunger outside the Ukrainian-speaking areas at the Holodomor time. I, personally, quite happy with the clause that Holodomor was a part of the general famine, but I noticed that many people do not like it. AFAIK, there are two reasons (correct me if I wrong): # Stating that Holodomor is a part of something bigger may look like trivializing of the tragedy; #It contradicts the theory that Holodomor was mainly an ethnic genocide of Ukrainians. The rest of the victims died because of class and social | policies of Soviet Government, not the ethnic policies. I have noticed that in all the estimations of the numbers of victims there we have separation between the whole of the Soviet Union and Ukraine the number of victims in Ukraine varies from a half to two thirds of the total. So, can we say instead of Holodomor being a part of the general famine, that the number of victims of Holodomor constitutes the majority of the death from the Soviet famine of 1932–33. This statement gives a relative scale of the two events. It provides the reference to the general famine but does not imply that they have the same causes, etc. = | 0 |
YOU SAD PRICK, try and delete the Graham Roff Experience | again, then we'll give you a punk rock beating | 1 |
" ==Speedy deletion of Linkory== A tag has been placed on Linkory requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our | subject-specific notability guideline for web content. If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or ""db"" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. " | 0 |
This is about me i am very cool. But you are stupid. I am | rich and i own a mansion and a limo. YOU PEOPLE ARE STUPID | 1 |
" I'm sure you don't want to keep the original page title because you're Korean Hmm thats interesting. I could accuse you of changing the page because you are Chinese, but thats a tit for tat move thats pretty lame. No need to get angry and rabble out all your accusations and facts. instead of the completely unknown ""Lake Chonji"". It seems you are out on a plan to expand everything on China. I have already repeated ""Tianchi"" is already used in other places in China and about the monster in the lake, that seems to be something like the Asian counterpart of the Loch Ness monster. Most of the search items are simply tourist information (since China is the | only way to tour the mountain), the mountain's name is Korean (no need for a Chinese name of the lake), and the title that is the most clear should be used. ""Tianchi"" is name for numerous other places, including a place called ""Urumqi"". We cannot just rely on google and other search engines alone. They are pretty crude for estimating how many articles are on the web, and it includes sites that do not relate to this article, like news articles, and company websites. ""Tianchi"" will bring up any webpage with a word ""Tianchi"", and that means it will include anything, even an article that mentions ""Tianchi"" once. If your case is strong, go argue at the Baekdusan talk page." | 0 |
== Do not invest with these people!!!== Anyone who gives | a dime to these men to invest is a fool. | 1 |
FUCK YOU YOU LIKE ANGELIQUE CARRINGTON | AND TAMARA HARRINGTON??????FUCK YOU ASSHOLE!!!!!! | 1 |
== SHUT UP! == SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT | UP SHUT UP SHUT UP! You need to SHUT UP right now! | 1 |
" ==Visit to Greece== I found this very intriguing article in a magazine called Odyssey and the feature is written by Jonathan Wingate. The photos show Ringo Starrr and Paul Mccartney in Greece in 1967 who visted Greece several times, watching locals folk dances at Itea, a seaside village on the coast below Delphi. According the press reports, the trip in July 1967 included a cruise of the Northern Sporades and a visity to Arahova, a mountain village near Delphi, where a short rest on a rooftop terrace turned into an impromptu celebration. Paul quotes: "" In the song 'Girl' that John wrote, there's a Zorba-like thing at the end that I wrote | which came from that holiday. I was impressed with another culture's approach because it was slightly different from what we did. We jsut did it on acoustic guitars instead of bouzoukis."" ""Ringo and I, particularly, used to be able to get off to Greece, because it was far enough away for nobody to know who we were. And I remember hanging around with the hotel cabaret band and watching them rehearse, trying to persuade them that we were in quite a decent group back in England. 'You know, yeahh, me and the other guy who's at the swimming pool, we're in this band called The Beatles'."" —Preceding unsigned comment added by " | 0 |
" *Not much compromise there, i think i was reverted in pretty much everything...Let's try again, again bit by bit: 1 - intro, no need for ""his"" consecutively (""he is known for HIS technical abilities, especially X and Y"", suffices like that); 2 - wikilinks, one thing is the COMPETITION and the other is the SEASON OF COMPETITION, so don't remove both the wikilinks please (it's ""qualified for"", one wikilink, the UEFA Cup Winners' Cup another wikilink, don't glue them please - but i was wrong in the name of the competition, i admit it and i apologize); 3 - you continue to write ""2007-08 season"" even though ""2007-08"" is enough, really fail to grasp that (2007-08 season, then 2009-10 season, then 2010-11 season, gets a bit tiring to | read); 4 - apparently we can't have SUBSTITUTE linked even though it's a WP article, fair enough i quit; 5 - the INT.GOALS chart: for the World Cup qualifiers we write QUALIFICATION, for European Championship qualifiers we write QUALIFYING, as describe in the proper articles OK? Also, why separate the link Faro, Portugal? I give up there as well; 6 - you may not like NFT.com, but it's one of the most used external links by the community, so it stays, P-L-E-A-S-E, as the national team data from the Spanish site (BDFUTBOL.com is also 100% reliable - the fact that the statistics chart or the text is full of reference does not mean the EXTERNAL LINKS section has to be void or with one or two). Attentively - " | 0 |
YOU GAY PRICK, WHY THE FUCK DID U REVERT | MY EDIT, ALL MUSLIM TERRORISTS SHOULD BE NUKED | 1 |
My mom should have aborted me. | [[User:MarnetteD|MarnetteD really is the troll | 1 |
:::::Excellent, thank you! (see isn't it better when i | fuck up before I send it out ;) | | 1 |
HE THEN TURNED IN A POSTIUTE AROUND THE CORNER OF | ADAMS AND BROADWAY! HE MAH BITCH NOW!!! BWAH HA HA!! | 1 |
::::::Your comparison here is way off. You cannot rename things and change science to fit with your political views. I am sorry that is not how the world (and not wikipedia) works. I studies physics at university, the word nuclear does not mean fusion! GO look at the nuclear bomb article they are both included there. On top of being just plane factually wrong, I don't even understand you objection. No one is proposing that the article be written to imply that nuclear power plants are using fusion. NO one is implying that the article make people believe that nuclear is ok as it currently stands since fusion is a possibility. Do you really think people are that stupid? Even if they are (which I don't | buy) that does not mean that we can change the facts to make you happy. I am not even advocating that fusion be mentioned in the introduction at all!!! I only want the introduction to be scientifically accurate and wording it to exclude fusion specifically is not only POV (in the ext ream) but it is wrong. You seem to think that not anti-nuclear is POV since you appear to think that only unreasonable people disagree with you. Well there was a version of the intro that called out Fusion, then there was your version that excluded it specifically, a version that does not mention it but does not exclude it is a nice NPOV compromise and has the added benefit of being scientifically/factually correct. | | 0 |
" ==Speedy deletion of Eduardo Borsuci== A tag has been placed on Eduardo Borsuci requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as | well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or ""db"" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. " | 0 |
" I made a mass restoral of Danny's removals. None of the removals were commentators praising Reigns, many of the removals were criticisms. Some removals seemed to me to be whitewashing - CM Punk saying Reigns was meant to be put over as strong was not a criticism. ""Accusations of the WWE rigging"" was not a criticism either, and that's quoted from the source. The final 3 being booed of the 2014 Rumble was gone as well. Everything removed was reliably sourced. May I point you to WP:WELLKNOWN. Roman Reigns is assuredly well known. In the case of public figures, there will | be a multitude of reliable published sources, and BLPs should simply document what these sources say. If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article – even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out. Criticism of Reigns (and his character) is well documented - and has occurred in virtually every industry specific reliable source in WP:PW/RS - except Pro Wrestling Illustrated, which is not readily available online - and even mainstream sources like TV.com." | 0 |
It's because hotmail sucks. you should get gmail. | hotmail is a pile of crap now | 1 |
" :Indeed! And upon our keen observation of Sinebot’s most perfidious behavior, Lord Dreadstar sorely chastised him by excising, with his most powerful sword of Light and Justice, the bot’s most repugnant and dog-like exclamations about M’Lady’s kind and warm remarks upon mine own pageth. Had we spied his vile notice on M'Lady's page, we would have gently removed it from thy most divine view, so thou wouldest not have been alarmed and concerned! Let the Dreaded One wipe the tears from thy cheeks, so thy golden smile will shine upon the earth once again! ::Hee hee, poor SineBot! Lady Ariel wonders if The Mighty and Powerful Lord Dreadstar, Master of my Domain, Earl | of Fashion, Keeper of the Keys of Justice, Banisher of Sinebot. receives any more titles, would he be flogged for ""spamming""! ♥ I shall take it upon myself to come up with a suitable ""short title"" for His Royal Mightyness.♥ :""..would he be flogged for ""spamming"""", wouldeth that be a promise? ;) If LD gets any more titles, it'll crash the 'pedia servers...lol..! ::I shall take it upon myself to come up with a suitable ""short title"" for His Royal Mightyness.Lady Ariel♥Humble servant :::My thanks dear lady, ere the weight of mine mighty titles press me to earth, n'er to rise again..and so long as it doth not end in 'poo'...e.g. ""Dreddypoo"". " | 0 |
Bullock frankly has no clue what the fuck he's talking | about and is clearly oblivious to the archival documents. | 1 |
" :""you might mention it was all your | fault our resolution was amicable."" Smart-arse! LOL " | 1 |
" :::::::::And in any way, the cases of EJ and GH are different. :::::::::The state of war between Syria and Israel never ended, which makes the occupation to be legal. But I don't see how it could be stated it is not a military one, given the state of war... :::::::::Sharon Korman in The right of conquest: the acquisition of territory by force in international law and practice, Oxford University Press, 1996. pg. 265 writes ""The continued occupation of the Syrian Golan Heights is recognized by many states as valid and consistent with the provisions of the United Nations Charter, on a self-defence basis. Israel, on this view, would | be entitled to exact as a condition of withdrawal from the territory the imposition of security measures of an indefinite charactersuch as perpetual demilitarization, or the emplacement of a United Nations forcewhich would ensure, or tend to ensure, that the territory would not be used against it for aggression on future occasions. But the notion that Israel is entitled to claim any status other than that of belligerent occupant in the territory which it occupies, or to act beyond the strict bounds laid down in the Fourth Geneva Convention, has been universally rejected by the international communityno less by the United States than by any other state."" ::::::::: " | 0 |
" == Any notability to his writings? == At the risk of personal embarrassment, i'll ask that someone comment on whether he is noted for what he wrote on military strategy: Is our article on him incomplete in failing to mention any titles by him? (The embarrassment part reflects the impetus for my question: i quote from the SF novel Ender's Shadow, p. 211 of the ""First mass market edition"" of Dec. 2000, where a ""Command School"" instructor says of the title character, one of the students, : ""I should have guessed. He picks up the voice of the strategists he's been reading. Or their translators. Though I don't know what will happen now | that he's he's [sic] been reading Frederick and Bulow in the original French and German...."" Not a WP:RS!) The char's presumably reading Frederick the Great (master of Sanssouci) in French and Dietrich Heinrich von Bülow in German. I did find on first try FREDERICK THE GREAT ""MILITARY INSTRUCTIONS"" and Frederick The Great On The Art Of War Paperback by Jay Luvaas; are Card's characters referring to French commentaries on what Fritz did, rather than any wisdom he put on paper (in French as he would apparently have naturally chosen, rather than German)? Or should we suppose that Card is exercising literary license to imagine Fritz having left extended 1st-hand testimony for the ages?• " | 0 |
" :This is a little problematic for a number of reasons. The published work in question has not been replicated, and doesn't mention homoeopathy. The solutions were not succussed, but agitated on a vortex apparatus, so were not ""prepared using a homeopathic procedure of serial agitation and ultra-high dilution"", and the dilutions from which signals were reportedly detected were not the ""ultra-high"" dilutions which have no solute left - the highest in which signals were detected was equivalent to about 18X, and this from a single experiment, most of the ""positives"" being below around 12X/6C. :Even taken at face value the published results don't show that ""the high dilutions are right"" | - they clearly show that there was an upper limit to the signal producing dilutions, which is a factor of about 1042 lower than the commonly used 30C potency. Homoeopathic dulution relies on the principle that there is no upper limit to dilutions that produce an effect. This work doesn't support the use of ultramolecular dilutions, and the article therefore cannot include a statement that implies that it does. :The bottom line, though, is that it needs to be independently replicated, and connected better to homoeopathy, before it can be used here. It is currently appropriate to the Luc Montagnier article it is copied and pasted from, but not here. " | 0 |
::That is, without a doubt, the most idiotic statement I have | EVER heard. So school teachers can't be gay? Dearest God. | 1 |
" ::::It was unduly provocative to do what you did, straight off a yearlong ban, i.e. walk in, throw out the lead, which has been written and rewritten several times, as per talk, and throw in your own personal text, unsourced, with material copied from Amadeus. You also removed large blocks of material that were impeccably sourced, in what looks more like WP:IDONTLIKEIT rather than respect for WP:NPOV. So, be a little more careful in future, and, I suggest, use the talk page more often. A large number of people have read the page over the past month, and very few objections have been raised to sourced material you summarily deleted. :::::I edited | according to WP:FILMLEAD, which the editors seem to be ignoring. Now, I'm not sure why in heaven you think just because some material or other is ""sourced"" then it must be in an article. Its all cherry picking isn't it? Anyhow, to repeat - check out WP:FILMLEAD, then check out 300 (film), then look at my edits and the edit summary provided. If you then have questions, let me know. In the meantime I've changed out ""loosely"" for ""fictionalized"" (as per the article I just recommended.) I reformatted the information as per policy. But I left in the giant out-of-weight plot synopsis to show you how out of place it is. Ta. " | 0 |
== Algorithmic undecidability == There's a dispute about the following text: :On a different note — some things may not be computable at all; in fact, this can be proven in some instances. For instance, in 1970, it was proven that there is no Turing machine which can solve all Diophantine equations (see Hilbert's 10th problem). and : There are thus some problems in number theory that will never be solved. We even know the shape of some of them, viz., Diophantine equations in nine variables; we simply do not know, and cannot know, which coefficients give us equations for which the following two statements are both true: there are no solutions, and we shall never know that there are no solutions. The second | assertion does not follow from the first. Just because there is no Turing machine that can determine for every Diophantine equation whether or not it has a solution, it does not follow directly that there is a Diophantine equation for which we cannot know whether or not it has a solution. It only means that we cannot know it simply by feeding it into a Turing machine. It does not preclude our knowing it some other way. A reference to a reliable source would be helpful here, such as Reprinted in The Collected Works of Julia Robinson, Solomon Feferman, editor, pp.269–378, American Mathematical Society 1996. In this, on page 326, we read it may be possible to devise ad hoc methods for particular equations. | 0 |
== Edit request from 205.122.64.147, 8 March 2011 | == your extremely stupid and this makes sense | 1 |
::::Yeah, 5 million, damn it!! My mom would be | angry if I came to her concert, lol. | 1 |
:::' Things You Should Quit Doing To Be More Successful- They say that at the very moment you want to quit, you’re actually almost there. “Yesterday you said tomorrow?” Seriously, stop that! Delaying or procrastinating around something that you think is important means one of two things. You’re either scared to start because it means your life will change or you want it for the wrong reasons (i.e. someone else is encouraging you to do it). When people tell me they’re doing something or making certain choices because they have “no choice,” it makes me want to bang my head on the table…and then put that on repeat. You have a choice in everything you do. Barring a | few really crazy exceptions, no one holds your hand to the fire on anything. When you say yes to a crappy review from your boss, you’re saying no to getting acknowledged for the great work that was overlooked. Suck it up. We all have things we don’t want to do, but we have to do them because we’re adults. We do things that aren't good for us, remain where we shouldn't and ... If there’s something you’re putting off because it’s boring you, it’s hard, physically demanding or tiring…just get up and get it done. Quit avoiding it. There will be rewards along the way and there will be a great sense of accomplishment at the end. | 0 |
== Pro and Con points == I reduced the number of the points, mostly to delete the statement that the best time is neonate. That's hogwash. Please see discussion for the research findings. Here's ~your version, and the text I had to compromise to with the pro guys: There is controversy regarding circumcision. Advocates of circumcision argue, for example, that it provides important health advantages which outweigh the risks, has no substantial effects on sexual function, has a low complication rate when carried out by an experienced physician, and is best performed during the neonatal period.[10] Opponents of circumcision argue, | for example, that it is defended through the use of myths, interferes with normal sexual function, is extremely painful, and when performed on infants and children violates the individual's human rights.[11] There is controversy regarding circumcision. Advocates of circumcision argue, for example, that it provides important health advantages which outweigh the risks, has no substantial effects on sexual function, and has a low complication rate when carried out by an experienced physician.[10] Opponents of circumcision argue, for example, that it adversely affects normal sexual pleasure and performance, is justified by medical myths, and is effectively comparable to female genital cutting.[11] | 0 |
If you are a perverbial Piss Pig and are looking | for a human Urinal send PatrikDutcher a MSG on AIM. | 1 |
== Megan == megan nelson she is a | paranoid freak from space she stinks of shit | 1 |
Now McNeight -labeled- me a tool and then didn't sign his | comment-I think he is probably the biggest fool of all!! | 1 |
"hi sorry to interrupt but I couldn't help but overhear this conversation about sockpuppetry. Cordless, if I may be so bold as to call you that, am I correct in assuming that a sock puppeteer is someone with multiple accounts [pretending to be more than one person obvs]? I am confounded how I was pulled in to the sock discussion on another page, so if you would be kind enough to translate: ""It makes no sense to register so all the deranged monkeys can throw shit at another foolish editor who joined the community of nutters like User:Lightbreather who has long used her backup sock User:Darknipples (obvious as hell by all the gun ban propaganda she promotes and coming on the scene first when LB thought she could be | banned and was temporarily and now has a new backup sock User:Asdiprizio which will in time edit gun articles but LB knows her recent permanent ban is to fresh to start promoting her anti-gun agenda through another sock. PS Do not edit others talk page duechebag. Addendum: Sorry to the lunatics who edit here and who are able to support themselves. "" what does this mean and what is being accused and who and am I target and does this help explain why my user page from wiki commons was deleted after I submitted (on wiki commons) my drawing of you and others (cordless larry drawing) with a creative commons license? sorry for being a bother, I don't mean to be needy and thank you again friend. " | 0 |
== Arabs are committing genocide in Iraq, but no protests | in Europe. == May Europe also burn in hell. | 1 |
== Somalia nigger == [soh-mah-lee-uh nig-er] A black | man arm and angry(someone from a gang) | 1 |
" Hello , and Welcome to Wikipedia! Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page. - Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia... Finding your way around: * Table of Contents * Department directory Need help? * Questions — a guide on where to ask questions. * Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes. * Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations | * Article Wizard - a Wizard to help you create articles * The Simplified Ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules. *Guide to Wikipedia — A thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia. How you can help: * Contributing to Wikipedia — a guide on how you can help. * Community Portal — Wikipedia's hub of activity. Additional tips... * Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your ""signature"" (your username and a date stamp). The button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this. * If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you. , good luck, and have fun. " | 0 |
every one who reads this wiil die=] )lol im sexy | and hot with huge boobies call me at 236 6679 | 1 |
Do you know that girls are not as stupid | as they look?but they are not smarter than boy | 1 |
its a peice of crap!!!!!!!lololol....jkjkjkjk i cant fid | any thig i need!!!! its making me sad!!!!! | 1 |
":::::* Alai's only comments on the asbox issue are this invective-fueled, zero-content rant, and its followup which does nothing to elaborate on the alleged ""wacky image sizes, sorting and oddball categorisation"" which are its sole pertinent contribution to the discussion. :::::* Pegship's contributions were a whole lot more contructive; she said that the asbox version was tidier, and agreed with many of the points raised. Her issues were that it wasn't easy to see how to use the template (which I resolved by rewriting its documentation) and that she ""wasn't sold on"" the need to migrate to it. That is hardly a damning | opposition. :::::* You have not, in fact, repeatedly given constructive feedback on the issue. What you have done is repeatedly attempted to kill off the discussion by saying that it was unwanted, that ""other editors"" disagreed with it, and that you gave your reasons in the past - which isn't helpful if nobody can actually find said points to raise them. :::::* If you're not willing to use your admin bit to help edit the template to accommodate changes (which is, after all, what you've got it for) then I suppose I'll raise an editprotected for the changes in question. ::::: - " | 0 |
== fucking a donkey == fuck up the arse if | u get it good u will start feeling it | 1 |
Bold text YA niggaz stupid I aint vandalize shit and all | of yall can suck my fat dick yall wikiopedia editing geeks. | 1 |
pls can you put a decent pic of him!!! | this one makes him look kind of stupid!!!........... | 1 |
" ==Speedy deletion of WW2- A short artical== A tag has been placed on WW2- A short artical, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding | to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or ""db"" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. " | 0 |
== Romanization of Serbian == Hey, I noteced your edits at that article, and I just wanted to tell you that you did a great job and to thank you for expanding it. made an effort to improve it, but you fixed it perfectly just after. The only part which is missing is the period between 1918-WWII. I beleave that must be the crutial period, as it was then that the languages were merged with the creation of the Serbo-Croato-Slovenian, and it must be during that period that the new language became bi-alphabetical. Thus it was then that Serbs start having the option of writting its language, now called S-C-S, in both alphabets. Makes sense, right? I can´t find any source for this, but all events make me come to this | conclusion. Anyway, all of this comes from a series of discussions about the use of diacritics in WP. I came late to the last one, and by now I am not sure there is any active discussion regarding it anymore. But new discussions will certainly appear, as no consensus was reached, and there are some users which strongly oppose the use of diacritics in article titles. In ictu oculi was in favour of diacritics, me too, although I would not mind that much if they end up eliminated. I mean, I am not fanatic over this, I just prefer them so correct native titles would be used, but I am OK if they end up being dropped, I would just prefer that a consensus is reached once and for all. | 0 |
" ::Oh. I was talking about ""This page got | deleted by some idiot. Come back later."" " | 1 |
== Maternal Sex Determination vs Wikipedia's article on Male XY determination == This article seems to completely contradict the article in Wikipedia about the XY chromosome determination of gender. Also, it states as if it is a definite point and proven past the point of being a theory or hypothesis but it doesn't seem have any proof. The other wikipedia article I read about the Male XY chromosome and the SRY gene seems to completely contradict this article. Furthermore, there are so many more other articles that go back in history in regards to 'observation' and 'populations' as well that doesn't seem to back this article up at all. If the male doesn't contribute the Y chromosome for the female | XX chromosome, then it would have to be proven without a doubt that the pellicuda could block the Y chromosome completely and select the X chromosome but I didn't see where this was proven. It has been stated in the wikipedia article about the male XY chromosome that the male either contributes the Y or the X, so how does the female body prove it can reject the Y and then the X will thus be contributed in turn from the male chromosome? Has that been observed and proven? Again, this article seems to be a huge contradiction and also what has been stated doesn't seem to have been backed up by a theory that has been proven. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_sex-determination_system | 0 |
The person who rewrote the biography (I re-wrote it again) is a coward who refuses to have a mature debate with me or other disciples. He edited the page again without permission or notice after all the talk we have had on the discussion. You are a coward (refering to the person who re-wrote the slanderous page)! You are only hurting the dharma. Even if you were shown proof that all the things that disciples claim are true then you still would deny the truth! You are a true demon in that case! Are you calling HH Kalu rinpoche a liar!? Are you calling HE Ganden Tri Rinphoche a liar!? You have some nerve! Debate with me! You dont have the guts! Pathetic....Accusing a man of rape with no | evidence!? How dare you!? This starting to test my dharma strength...I hope the best with this. May my Dharma brother who is confused have the strength to come face to face with the truth. I know it seems hard to swallow but accept it or ignore it but dont hurt your fellow cultivators. Question yourself...Do you think the Buddha would want this? Do you think Siddhartha Gautama would do the same thing even if he thought there was cause for concern in the dharma community? Do you think he would mindlessly go out and vandalize? Come on please talk with me man to man. If you need proof of what im talking about please visit the history page and visit the last edit before the most recent one. | 0 |
all dallas cowbiys fans are fucking faggots you can all | go suck a big fat cock you stupid fucking homos | 1 |
" I just want to reply to 's comment ""This is the kind of mis-conception that I mean: ""...the United Kingdom which was created in 1801 and existed until the inception of the Irish Free State..."" Eh, no. The United Kingdom that was created in 1801 still exits."" I agree of course that the present-day United Kingdom is the successor state of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, but it is a dramatically different country, smaller and with a parliament no longer obsessed by Irish questions. From 1801 the term ""United Kingdom"" meant Britain and Ireland together. In 1922 it became clear to all that that kind | of ""United Kingdom"", the one created in 1801, no longer existed, and indeed the term ""United Kingdom"" was quickly dropped from the Royal titles and from many other official uses. In the mid-1920s Encyclopædia Britannica even started to call what was left of the British state ""Great Britain"". In 1927, after a long period of uncertainty, the term ""Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland"" was adopted, and ""United Kingdom"" staged a comeback in official use, but it was obviously a term used to abbreviate a different name. The pre-1922 and post-1922 United Kingdoms must be distinguished from each other in many contexts. " | 0 |
*As far as I'm concerned you're all idiots and | I'm going to block you both for edit warring. | 1 |
"::I just draw new maps. See them here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Salan_glad01.png and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ahtum_sermon01.png However, I left Ahtum as independent ruler, as he is also shown on this map of Euratlas: http://www.euratlas.com/big/big1000.htm (On that map, Srem, Bosnia, Raška, Duklja, etc are all shown as part of Bulgarian Empire, but Voivodship of Ahtum is shown separatelly, as well as Duchy of Gyula). I agree that Ahtum's role can be explained by the situation in Bulgaria in the early 11th, but still we should rather define him as ally instead of vassal of Bulgarian Empire. Also, Salan was descendant of Bulgarian ruler which conquered | land between Danube and Tisa, thus he rather gained land that he ruled by heritage instead that he was appointed by the tsar. Regarding article on Serbian Wikipedia, you should know that we lived in the same state with Macedonians for long time and that Serbian historical books are no different than Macedonian when they speak about Samuil. I do not see big problem about this, and if you ask me, we can say that Samuil was both, Bulgarian and Macedonian tsar, as well as former Kievan Rus is part of history of all: Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. " | 0 |
" :: In no way did I support any conspiracy theory. Real third party evidence is provided: a BBC4 article clearly discusses the RADIO and TV appearance. I hope Snowed is not supported by moderators in claiming that the youtube videos are forgeries, since Peter Power himself does refer to them and never claims them to be fakes. Clearly the subject is also relevant because Mr Power and BBC4 were compelled to issue lenghty, repeated statements (that make the TV appearance seem even stranger). As to personal attack: Do you think that anything that reflects negatively on a Person must be expunged from Wikipedia? I am simply reporting a well known fact (recorded!) that makes one think. Since when does wikipedia think for it's | readers? To revert my edits with the unsubstantiated(!) ""conspiracy theory"" allegation as rationale is a clear violation of a fundamental Wikipedia principle NPOV. Peter Power may or may not be a decent human being, this is not for us to decide, rather we should let facts speak. Snowed! If you still think that I am peddling a ""conspiracy theory"" I urge you to look at the precise wording of my insert. If someone feels that the wording hints at a hidden agenda, I must remind you that the hidden agenda is in the TV appearance of Peter Power itself. In light of grave violation of wikipedia principles I wish this topic to be discussed urgently and my edits be reinstated immediately by Snowed. " | 0 |
==History of Zimbabwe== I was wondering why you reverted all the edits I made. As you know I spent much time several months ago building up this article. I was merely trying to improve it. : Three reasons: * Inconsistent spelling style * Unnecessary addition of section titles * There is a separate article for Zimbabwe's economic history I was trying to standardize the spellings with US type. I am quite amenable to use the variant used in Zimbabwe – presumably the British English style. If you look at many history articles you will see many sub sections - they make it easier for the | user to navigate the article. See History of France German Empire As far as the economic history goes - it does have a separate page. However in the same way that a small section for history is put on the main Zimbabwe page similarly a small economic section should be put here. One cannot understand Zimbabwe’s history since 1980 unless one has a notion of its economic history. Had its economy performed better undoubtedly the politics would have been radically different. I was deliberately very brief. I also added some photos that legitimately illustrate the article. Could we not discuss these piece by piece. | 0 |
== Neutral Point of View on Articles on Fringe Topics == I don't know if this is a problem with this article specifically, but I posted this on some other articles relating to 9/11 conspiracy theories and thought it might be helpful here. In articles on fringe topics, we are not supposed represent the fringe theory as if it is a legitimate viewpoint or on some kind of equal footing. Instead, we're supposed to fairly represent all sides of an issue per reliable sources. If reliable sources reflect a particular viewpoint, then we're supposed to represent that viewpoint as well. In a case such as this article, I doubt if there are many (if any) reliable | sources that claim the WTC was destroyed via controlled demolition. Even if there are any, weight should be roughly proportional to the preponderance of reliable sources backing that perspective. As a result, there might be a WP:NPOV issue with this article. This article should treat this topic in the same manner as reliable sources do. Thus, if NIST, Popular Mechanics, the BBC, ABC News, Time Magazine, etc. regard the controlled demolition conspiracy theory as outlandish bunk unsupported by factual evidence, that that's how this article should be written. To do otherwise, is against WP:NPOV. In other words, the viewpoints of reliable sources are the standard by which we write our articles and judge its neutrality. | 0 |
:fy stupid monkey,fuck chitalu and your mom moron,chitalu is | a fucking shit ,nobody heard about this shit ever. | 1 |
" Yes Mister Haworth, I am John Reppion and, as far as I knew, I had signed the above comment by placing four ~s in brackets. I believed that this was the correct method of signing an article or comment on Wikipedia but, if this is not the case, I apologise for any confusion caused; this is the first such article I have created and the first time I have ever had to leave comments. ""Writing up a friend or colleague is almost as much vanity as writing about youirself."" This seems a very strange thing to say. Isn't the whole point of Wikipedia that we share our knowledge of all things? Therefore, doesn't it stand to reason that people who actually | know the individuals they are writing about should be the best source of information? Are scientists writing about their own theories or findings being arrogant or vain or are they simply giving us the benefit of their knowledge? Should people who know individuals be excluded from writing or editing articles about them? I think that sounds a bit stupid. ""But I do not indulge in revert wars, remove the prod tag (it is not illegal to do so) and see how I react."" No idea what any of that means but some kind and knowledgable individual seems to have sorted the page out, removed the deletion recommendation and added the ISBN for the Albion (comics) trade paperback. Sorted! John Reppion ( )" | 0 |
You bet this article sounds like an advertisement rather than an encyclopedic lemma. The problem, not only with the lemma but with the movement 'Teach First', is that the goals are ill-defined. When is 'Teach First' a success? When is it a failure? It is easy to throw public money around, and start well-intended projects. It is harder to set clear goals and reach them. :In my country, The Netherlands, the ministry of Education is 'inspired' by Teach First and Teach for America, and spends an awful lot of public money to educate... 19 high-potential graduates this year. Easily triple the sum of money spent on raising ordinary teachers. The promise: 'Teach first for two years, 10 hours a | week, then we'll promise you a job outside education'. The quite unhidden message is: 'Don't take education seriously as a career opportunity. Don't become a teacher'. And 19 graduates? The Netherlands has a lack of 5.000 academic graduates entering education. No graduate in their right mind wants to enter an underpaid, underappreciated and overworkloaded job - unless the economic crisis forces them to, or unless it is their road to a guaranteed McKinsey job. :But this is an encyclopedic lemma, not an opinion. If you want to add facts, add the number of graduates still working in education two years after completion of the 'Teach First' project. I think those numbers are in themselves both factual and critical enough. | 0 |
U!! WIKIPEDIA IS GOIN DOWN IM CRASHING THE | SITE YOU ASSHOLES AND DELETING THE IP ADRESS | 1 |
" == Pasta cooking with admixture of oil == Oil would not necessarily stay at the top. If the water is boiling and therefore agitated, droplets of oil could be drawn down to the pasta, and some might stick to it. I recommend speedy deletion of this item. — Preceding unsigned comment added by :I had a look at one of the sources for this statement, and it actually reads: ""You may have heard that you can avoid sticky pasta by adding oil to the pasta water. This can prevent sticking, but at a great price. Pasta that's cooked in oily water will become oily itself and, as a result, the sauce slides off, doesn't get absorbed, and you have flavorless pasta."" (My emphasis). This is | in direct contradiction to the statement that oil in the water does not prevent sticking. I also feel, based on my own experience, that it is unlikely that the oil ""just stays on top"" during a vigorous boil. I support removal. == Another monosodium glutamate myth == It's a myth that it causes baldness in women who eat a lot of it. The baldness is actually genetic - the middle aged Chinese women go a bit thin on top and this is not uncommon among ethnic Chinese women in Malaysia about 50 years old, the hair still being black. :Please read the ""Please read before proposing new entries""-box at the top of this page, and provide sources that this myth fulfills the 4 criteria. " | 0 |
== Shamrock pirates vanity>? == How are the shamrock pirates non notable? i beleive they ar more famous than ANY of the other people on a list. plus i have almost now affiliation with the band so vanity WTF? *I doubt your opinion will be supported by the vast majority of the Wikipedia community. – *Dude if you were cool enough to have actual seen the pirates play thered be no argument...... they blow ripchordf outta the wate man *Hello... Tom Palmer is a member... Therefore I agree with Warren. Plus your spelling is awful, Armitage. *Actually They were both Palmer. but seriously the pirates ROCK, armitidge is a nob | , he took vandalising the ags site tooooooooooooo faaaaaaaaaaar. ::Palmer and other bored Sixth Formers at AGS: why not try your hand at Uncyclopedia? It's a great place! Seriously guys, censorship is uncool, go get a life and leave the pirates alone! Yeah shamrock pirates Friggin OWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Shamrock Pirates are ace literally......! there wicked Shamrock Pirates are the most exciting band to come out of adams grammar school ever, palmer fidge boyle and tim all complement each others with palmers rock out with his cock out attitude , fidges indieness, tims jesus lovin or boyles homose*ualness. they write ace songs and are fuc*in ace live.! hail the pirates... Mr Barrat | 0 |
that your institution is a worthless and | brainwashing place. Also, the food sucks | 1 |
relevant, but i think id be cool to say that | this girls is a whore just like her sister britney | 1 |
U don't know anything about gaa that | was useful and insightful information. You dick | 1 |
Fuck You== You think you are the shit don't you?. | Well you're not you're just a cock starved hooker == | 1 |
Oh yes, but leave the fucking sub heading up. | Go fuck your selves.! This article is a joke!! | 1 |
== Whos The Fucktard! == Who the hell screwd | up her moveset and all the other things???!!!!!!! | 1 |
are you guys retarded? this is a procharger | for a car not some other gay thing | 1 |
:WP:LEDE is a guideline, rather than a set of rules - but I see your point to some extent. The trouble is that the article is structured in such a way that criticisms such as Bardi's don't really fit in anywhere. He isn't evaluating 'the device', he is evaluating Rossi's claims regarding it. And since everything we know about the device (beyond the obvious, that it is a device which seems to take cold water in at one end, and emit hot water and/or steam at the other) is solely sourced to Rossi, Rossi is now flatly contradicting things he said earlier, and is still refusing to let anyone do any meaningful independent evaluation at all, one has to ask whether we should be | implying in our article that it is the device that is now the centre of attention, rather than Rossi. Perhaps the section entitled 'Evaluation of the device' should be retitled 'Evaluation of claims regarding the device' - and expanded. Bardi has actually written about the E-Cat several times, and a little more of his sceptical take on the matter might be as good thing, per WP:FRINGE, and WP:PARITY in particular. If we can show why Bardi describes the affair as 'pathological science' in more detail, we can cover some of the issues that have had to be left out for now, as lacking WP:RS. If we do this, there seems no reason why we can't also quote Bardi in the lede, if appropriate. | 0 |
" ::: Also erstens wird es bei dict.cc übersetzt. Den Link habe ich sogar als EF benutzt: http://www.dict.cc/german-english/Nebelwerfer.html und zweitens ist es irrelevant, wie die Namensgeschichte im Deutschen ist. Die Nebelwerferkategorie sind keine Mörser oder Granatwerfer, nur die nahezu unbekannten frühesten Vertreter waren das. Die ""smoke mortar"" Übersetzung ist Unsinn. Wer die englishcen Fachbegriffe kennt, der weiß, dass diverse Waffen, die man im Deutshcen als Werfer bezeichnen könnte, als ""launcher"" oder ""projector"" bezeichnet werden. Dein festkrallen an einer Übersetzung die maximiert missverständlcih ist - und dann noch als 'beste | Übersetzung bezeichnet' ist einfach nur peinlich. Obendrein ist Wikipedia eine Enzyklopädie, die ist nicht dafür gedacht, irreführend zu sein so wie die ""smoke mortar"" 'Übersetzung' es ist. Nun überlege mal, was deine Schreiberei überhaupt soll - unbedingt Recht haben wollen und dabei irreführenden Blödsinn schreiben? Und ich habe bereits erwähnt, das sich die Materie sehr gut kenne, du hast offensichtlich nciht ml eine Ahnung, wie gut ich diesen Scheiß kenne. Und wenn du die Typen da anrufst wird voraussichtlich nur herauskommen, dass alle drei Übersetzungen genannt werden. " | 0 |
:: OK I'm sorry if I missed your other point. It's just that I've been trying to follow this discussion for several days and it might actually be better if everybody used bullet points (the horror!) rather than discursive paragraphs. I didn't mean to single you out — I'm just as irritated with Isarig's style as I am with yours. However, I think Isarig does have a point: until we actually check what the facts are, it's one person's claim against another person's claim. This doesn't mean Cole is a liar or incompetent; it's just that in the in the course of collecting the references WP needed to support statements | in WP, this particular piece is not available. Now granted, I agree presumption is heavily on Cole's side here, and if he is wrong, this should be very easy to prove (as you say if he were wrong this would be very embarrassing). But this kind of reasoning though useful for some purposes, is not sufficient to justify this presumption for WP. Imagine that we were talking about the validity of some mathematical formula. Until a widely accepted justification is published, I don't care who says it's true, we can't claim it's true. :: But maybe this point is moot anyway, since we're not actually talking about changing the article. | 0 |
Unfortunately, he's right. But if I ever see this fucker | I'm going to beat the shit out of him. | 1 |
" :Your lack of a sense of humour appals me. I will leave my Joyce quotation off the talk page since you made such a bloody issue of it. It was a joke for Sarah777, sympathising with the frustration that led her to paste that text on the talk page. It was my intention to leave it there for 24 or 48 hours to give her a chance to see it, then I intended to wipe the whole thing. There is another thing that burns me: it is appropriate for an editor to change an article, but a talk page is where people talk, and you should leave talk unmolested unless something seriously egregious has been written there. Quoting Simon Dedalus about heartburn on the arse as a token of annoyance cannot be | considered to fall within that definition but to my mind, following your grim presumption, I consider you to be a burning case of heartburn on my arse. My comment concerning saddle sniffers to illustrate a certain Irish type elicited an amused reply of recognition from Sarah777 and that conversation is simply none of your business — so butt out of mine. ""It is inappropriate, unfunny and unwise to take the path you're on"" — that is pure bullshit; you have no authority to speak to me like that. People like you fuck up Wikipedia for everyone else. I reject your attempt to shape my conversations with other users: it is none of your business. Your comment about the seriousness of illicit drugs is spurious sanctimony, a very unattractive quality. — O'Dea " | 0 |
" == Allegations of plagiarism == Someone (user 71.92.223.186 among others) keeps editing/reverting parts of this page to versions which favor the original early 1980s lineup of the band, marginalize their post-1980s work, and make allegations of plagiarism against band member Joe Escalante (the entry for Escalante experiences similar issues). This should stop for several reasons: #The edits you make provide a less complete, less accurate description and biography of the band than the current version. #Your references to allegations of plagiarism do not cite or link to any reliable sources. They link to a personal website with no citations, and to a barely-legible newspaper article with no publication title or date, so | it cannot be verified (and believe me, I've tried searching for it using an LA Times article search engine). #The edits you make pose some rather serious allegations and could be interpreted as libel. If you are going to add this kind of information you need to provide a verifiable citation. Personal websites and scans of articles do not qualify. You should find citations for your article and/or court documents, or at least a link to a reliable news source with further information. You should also add the information in a manner that maintains the article's neutrality, rather than marginalizing the rest of the band's history to focus on your ""controversial"" information." | 0 |
":Hi Steve, :# Noted on your comments about need for references before creating a SIEW 2011 section. Hence we will not do this at least until the official website itself is refreshed with more complete information. :# If there are no issues with you, may I go ahead and delete the line on Panasonic before a sponsor in the 2010 section? Reason we'd like to delete it - sponsors not mentioned in the previous years, so we'd like to be consistent and as neutral as possible. (Aside: is this considered a minor edit that I can go ahead and make without bothering you?) :# Thanks for being open to a compromise on | the intro line. To make it a little more specific on the issues discussed at the conference (while trying to avoid ad speak), how about this: ""SIEW is an annual week-long energy conference for businesses, industry experts, policy makers and academia to come together and discuss sustainable solutions for the global energy crisis."" :# Regarding photos, does it work to link to the official SIEW Flickr account, so that Wikipedia readers know where to go to view event photos? Or is the only way of putting photos on the Wiki page via uploading the photos on Wikimedia Commons? :Once again, many thanks for your help and advice on this. ) " | 0 |
i think i want to know how the sperm looks like. did | you every know and you guys are come from your mom virgina | 1 |
== Categorization of Turkish Cypriot politicians == Greetings Saguamundi I have been asked for a comment regarding the stub templates used for Turkish Cypriots, and I notice that you show an interest in these articles. I am the person that originally tagged the Cypriots as Europeans rather than Asians and I do of course agree that the island of Cyprus geographically is an extension of Anatolia and consequently a part of Asia, but I believe that most editors and readers will be more likely to associate the island with Europe rather than with Asia, so this was the reason for sorting the stub templates the way I did. Originally, we just used for all articles, but the material became | so big that we broke it up by continent. I suspect that a stub template for Middle East politicians will eventually be split off from the and if this happens I would like to avoid the risk of having to tag Cypriot material with templates for both Europe, Asia, and the Middle East all at the same time. ) AFAIK, WP:WSS has, simply for practical purposes, categorized Cyprus under Europe, but if you feel strongly about this issue, may I suggest that you take the matter up with WP:WSS so this issue can be debated and so we can ensure that all Cypriot material will be grouped the same way nomatter which solution is chosen? Happy editing. / | 0 |
LOL uncle Dick needs no harassment because hes got | a name that reminds of the male reproductive organ. | 1 |
:Trolling again, Cwobeel? You need to learn how | to stop shooting off your mouth, right? | 1 |
== Semi-protected edit request on 18 June | 2014 == harry has four nipples | 1 |
Subsets and Splits