Knowledgebattle (talk | contribs) |
Volunteer Marek (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
What you doing is really does look like stalking and harassment. you can be blocked.--[[User:Jobas|Jobas]] ([[User talk:Jobas|talk]]) 18:07, 19 October 2015 (UTC) |
What you doing is really does look like stalking and harassment. you can be blocked.--[[User:Jobas|Jobas]] ([[User talk:Jobas|talk]]) 18:07, 19 October 2015 (UTC) |
||
:{{Reply|Jobas}} Whatever it is that you're referring to here, just consider if you did it first, which might have elicited such a response. Don't do it, yourself. [[User:Knowledgebattle|K<sup>n</sup>o<sub>w</sub>l<sup>e</sup>d<sub>g</sub>e B<sup>a</sup>t<sub>t</sub>l<sup>e</sup>]] 18:15, 19 October 2015 (UTC) |
:{{Reply|Jobas}} Whatever it is that you're referring to here, just consider if you did it first, which might have elicited such a response. Don't do it, yourself. [[User:Knowledgebattle|K<sup>n</sup>o<sub>w</sub>l<sup>e</sup>d<sub>g</sub>e B<sup>a</sup>t<sub>t</sub>l<sup>e</sup>]] 18:15, 19 October 2015 (UTC) |
||
Regardless of "who started it" you really need to stop. You most definitely need to stop messing with the other users' comments or removing them, like you did [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/French_Oceania,_WWII_Emergency_issue,_Bons_de_Caisse_(1943)&diff=prev&oldid=686530974 here] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Knowledgebattle here] as that's a pretty clear cut evidence of harassment. Not going to warn you again.<span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Volunteer Marek|<font style="color:orange;background:blue;font-family:sans-serif;">''' Volunteer Marek '''</font>]]</span> 18:25, 19 October 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== October 2015 == |
== October 2015 == |
Revision as of 18:25, 19 October 2015
Nomination of Failed Bible prophecies for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Failed Bible prophecies is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Failed Bible prophecies until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --Non-Dropframe talk 10:33, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
- @Non-dropframe: Cool, thanks for letting me know. Knowledge Battle 02:48, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Warning at User talk:143.231.249.141#October 2015
Please read Wikipedia:No personal attacks. While you may have good intentions in the background, you are not being helpful when the body of your warning is insults. Thanks. Dustin (talk) 21:20, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Dustin V. S.: They're fucking politicians. Everything they say and do will be skewed. I understand, and will comply; but resentfully, as they deserve no respect. Knowledge Battle 22:38, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Salem witches
I'm not sure the "Persecution by Christians" category works here, though I think I see where you're coming from. May we discuss this? Kafka Liz (talk) 22:05, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Kafka Liz: Sure, we can talk about it. When Muslims in the Middle-East behead Christians in the Middle East, it's called "persecuting Christians". Christians hanged/beheaded/burned at the stake/stabbed to death/etc many men, women, and their children (even when the rest of the family wan't involved with the alleged fake "crime" of witchcraft), as well as many other times throughout history.
- There will be no double standard; it is persecution.
- Christianity has the longest running history of persecution, yet Christians hide it by explaining away why they think certain events aren't persecution (such as the Witch Trials, or the Cathar massacre), often by saying, "But those weren't 'TRUE' Christians." It's hypocritical to determine who a "TRUE" Christian (every individual's own definition of what a "true" Christian differs, but literally-speaking, a Christian is just someone who believes in the Bible, OT & NT). It's especially hyptocritical, when the persecution was specifically done in the name of the religion.
- There are Categories on Wikipedia for "Persecuting by" and "Persecution of" for other groups. If the "Persecution by Christians" is left ignored, then Christians will wrongfully continue to think that their pits don't stink, and that if everyone would just believe in the book they do, that the world would just be butterflies and roses. Knowledge Battle 01:01, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
- Well, my thinking was more along the lines that "Persecution by Christians" implies that those persecuted belonged to some other "non-Christian" group, but more importantly, there's also the fact that the Salem witch trials were complicated by other issues - social class, for example, and attention-seeking teenagers - that weren't directly related to religion. The category seems better applied to the Cathar massacre, the Spanish Inquisition, or the Crusades, to my thinking, since all of these were purely motivated by religion. The events at Salem are rather less clear cut, which makes me uncomfortable with the label. It seems like a bit of an oversimplification. One could label just about any miscarriage of justice in the Western world as "Persecution by Christians", if we only look at the religion of those committing the wrongs. Is the Mountain Meadows massacre also "Persecution by Christians"? Is the murder of Emmett Till? Technically, yes, but I think it overlooks the deeper reasons behind such events. Kafka Liz (talk) 06:28, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Kafka Liz: Yea, I agree with you. A Christian who goes crazy and murders his Jewish wife because she shops too much would be guilty of murder, but wouldn't necessarily be guilty of "persecuting" anyone. However, the Christians who killed the so-called "witches" wouldn't have done so, had not the superstition existed that magic was real, and if their Bible's didn't tell them to kill witches. In almost every case of persecution, there's almost always extra social factors that play a part.
- - For example, do Middle-Eastern Muslims persecute Jews and Christians all the time? No. In fact, there are Mosques and Churches in parts of the Middle-East. Do some M/E Muslims persecute Jews/Christians sometimes, though? Yes, and there are groups that will do so, if they come across J/C's. However, what's usually their reason for doing so? Is it only because they practice a different religion? Sometimes, but that's not usually the case. Many M/E Muslims feel disdain for Jews, because they feel that Jews are invading their space over there, with the establishment of Israel; that would be a political incentive, with a touch of religious incentive. Some M/E Muslims feel that Christians of the West are "secularizing" and introducing "cultural innovation" to their Shari'a societies; that would be a cultural incentive, with a touch of religious incentive. However, when Al-Qaeda members fly an airplane into the World Trade Center, or when Christian churches are destroyed because they don't conform to an Islamic society - no matter what extra social factors play a part, religion is still a driving force. Many, but not all, M/E Muslims persecute non-Muslims (although they mostly just persecute other Muslims, for belonging to "the wrong sect").
- - Similarly, back in the late 1600s, there were extra social factors. However, Christians believed in magic, and believed that witches could practice magic, because Exodus 22:18 states, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." However, people who call themselves "witches" nowadays, usually practitioners of Wicca, almost never get killed anymore, because most modern Christians don't believe in the superstitions of Exodus, anymore. Thus, today's Christians are typically more religiously tolerant, and that persecution almost never occurs, anymore. No matter how ridiculous Wiccans are, it's a positive thing that they're not being killed. Knowledge Battle 06:48, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
- Mulling this over for a bit. Agree on many points, but need more coffee for a thoughtful reply :) Kafka Liz (talk) 06:55, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Kafka Liz: Try an energy drink. I drink, perhaps, 4-6 of them a day. The caffeine effects are glorious. Knowledge Battle 06:57, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
- Mulling this over for a bit. Agree on many points, but need more coffee for a thoughtful reply :) Kafka Liz (talk) 06:55, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
- Well, my thinking was more along the lines that "Persecution by Christians" implies that those persecuted belonged to some other "non-Christian" group, but more importantly, there's also the fact that the Salem witch trials were complicated by other issues - social class, for example, and attention-seeking teenagers - that weren't directly related to religion. The category seems better applied to the Cathar massacre, the Spanish Inquisition, or the Crusades, to my thinking, since all of these were purely motivated by religion. The events at Salem are rather less clear cut, which makes me uncomfortable with the label. It seems like a bit of an oversimplification. One could label just about any miscarriage of justice in the Western world as "Persecution by Christians", if we only look at the religion of those committing the wrongs. Is the Mountain Meadows massacre also "Persecution by Christians"? Is the murder of Emmett Till? Technically, yes, but I think it overlooks the deeper reasons behind such events. Kafka Liz (talk) 06:28, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
I'm still not comfortable with the category in this instance, as it implies that those persecuted were non-Christian, or heretics, or somehow outside the community, which was not entirely the case. The events at Salem involved a community turning upon its own members, some of whom were viewed as undesirable and some who were blameless and upstanding by the measures of the time.
I've traveled in Turkey, Greece, and Israel and seen mosques, churches, and temples practically side by side in several of the towns I visited (though not all were in comparable states of use).
To address your questions: No, of course not all Muslims persecute Christians. We both know that. Yet those who do seem to rely primarily on religious justification for their actions.* The question of how Muslims regard Jews is significantly more complicated and is not something I'm prepared to address in this forum. I'm also aware of the friction between Sunni, Shi'ite and Alevi factions of Islam.
- As, in fairness, do Christians who once persecuted those of other faiths and those who continue to persecute people of differing sexualities.
You do raise some good points though. Food for thought. Kafka Liz (talk) 07:44, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Answer
What you doing is really does look like stalking and harassment. you can be blocked.--Jobas (talk) 18:07, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Jobas: Whatever it is that you're referring to here, just consider if you did it first, which might have elicited such a response. Don't do it, yourself. Knowledge Battle 18:15, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Regardless of "who started it" you really need to stop. You most definitely need to stop messing with the other users' comments or removing them, like you did here and here as that's a pretty clear cut evidence of harassment. Not going to warn you again. Volunteer Marek 18:25, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
October 2015
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on The Holocaust. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Huritisho 18:21, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Huritisho: It doesn't seem as if @Jobas: is interested in going to the Talk page about it. He feels entitled to simply remove the tag. Probably because he's engaged in Wikipedia:Christianity, which seeks to instill Christian propaganda, and whitewashing of Christianity's crimes. As far as I'm concerned the tag stays. If he wants to talk about it on the Talk page, then he should bring it up - not remove the tag. Knowledge Battle 18:24, 19 October 2015 (UTC)