Tom harrison (talk | contribs) →MOU is back: yeah... |
MuslimsofUmreka (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 203: | Line 203: | ||
On ''Islamism'', I doubt I have much influence with him. Unless someone can convince him of the virtues of consensus and incremental change, I think things will just have to take their course. [[User:Tom harrison|Tom Harrison]] <sup>[[User talk:Tom harrison|Talk]]</sup> 22:23, 21 April 2006 (UTC) |
On ''Islamism'', I doubt I have much influence with him. Unless someone can convince him of the virtues of consensus and incremental change, I think things will just have to take their course. [[User:Tom harrison|Tom Harrison]] <sup>[[User talk:Tom harrison|Talk]]</sup> 22:23, 21 April 2006 (UTC) |
||
:First off all, I would like to start off with that I am not user: ShawnCarter. All the other suckpoppets listed under my name are mine, except for InDaHoodSoGhetto who is someone else I asked to remove the templates. And also ShawnCarter is not a sockpuupet of mine. I do not know where that assumption came from. I know I said, I would stay away from the page, so I am gonna try to stick to that. [[User:MuslimsofUmreka|MuslimsofUmreka]] 22:40, 21 April 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:40, 21 April 2006
Greetings!
My name is Ryan, and it's my pleasure to welcome you, Kyaa the Catlord, to Wikipedia! First of all, I'd like to thank you for joining the project, and contributing to articles and discussion. I hope you can continue to take part in Wikipedia, because we need more valuable editors like yourself.
If you are new and need some assistance, here are some great links to check out:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia are the primary goals and most important rules that we follow.
- These help pages are important if you'd like to learn more about specific processes.
- The tutorial is a hands-on approach to learning all about editing.
- For a "crash course" in editing, head on over to Redwolf24's Bootcamp!
- Writing a great article is a noble accomplishment. An article you start might end up on the Main Page!
- The Manual of style is an in-depth group of pages that will teach you how to make articles look their very best.
I hope you enjoy editing here, and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, find out where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Before I go, here's one more tip. When you post on talk pages, be sure to sign your name and the date by typing four tildes: ~~~~. That automatically generates your username and the date. Again, welcome, and happy editing! --Merovingian 10:27, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Tookie Williams
Hey! Wanted to let you know I enjoyed collaborating with you on the Tookie Williams article. Like you, I'm kind of more interested in the event and it's aftermath than the actual person (morbid, I know). Thanks again! Joe McCullough 17:47, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Hopefully fixed the attribution problem. Thanks. --Beth Wellington 15:52, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Welcome from the Genvid forums
I'm sure you would recognize me as the guy with this "wonky" code system. Anyway, welcome to Wikipedia, I hope you have a blast contributing, and I hope I can see others from the Genvid forums come and contribute to Wikipedia. BTW, I'm an administrator here, so if you need any help, I'm available. -- Denelson83 22:50, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
- Grin. Yeah, I remember you well. :D (I'm still upset you were banned. Then again, I was banned. I got better tho!) :P Kyaa the Catlord 23:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Kyaa ^_^ (Btw Denelson I'm The_Otaku_Witch). I think are a few more Genvidders & ex-Genvidders who are Wikipedian's too. GracieLizzie 13:59, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, I knew you were a genvidder, just wasn't sure which one. :D Kyaa the Catlord 14:03, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the edit (fix) at yllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy. GeorgeBills 07:09, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for that funny site. A little humor could go a long way right now, too bad some people just refuse to realize that. AscendedAnathema 07:58, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
Also, if you found that lego-Mohammed/postmodernism satire amusing, you might also enjoy this: [1]AscendedAnathema 08:08, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
- Ryan, if you want to revert the image in this article, I support that, but please be careful not to revert numerous unrelated improvements to the article as you do so. Please restore the other changes you reverted. Thanks. Babajobu 09:31, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
- I tried. Sorry. I saw the image moved AGAIN and tried to move it back before editting went on. Gods blood, can't people get it already. Kyaa the Catlord 09:33, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
- No problem, and don't wonder why you bother to touch the article, your work is appreciated! Babajobu 10:03, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
Despite the Islamic prohibition against depictions of Muhammad, in the past Muslims have created non-satirical depictions. However, many Muslims have publicly indicated that they perceive the Jyllands-Posten cartoons as implying that all Muslims are terrorists, by depicting Muhammad with a bomb and for collaborating with terrorists (by receiving them in heaven).
Is this evidence good enough? ^ Abdelhadi, Magdi, "Cartoon row highlights deep divisions", BBC, 4 February 2006. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4678220.stm Rajab 11:38, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
- It would be fine, it was not there beforehand. Of course, its duplication of the same ground covered in the NEXT paragraph. Let's try to be concise, please? Kyaa the Catlord 11:39, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
- you're right - we need to be concise.... Pervasive is an excellent word by the way :) Rajab 11:45, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Islamophobia
Yah, the only reason I can tell is because Islam is capitalized. :) gren グレン ? 12:05, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy
It wasn't vandalism, I tried to archive but forgot to type edit message →AzaToth 18:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Right Wing controversy
Do you have any links for the previous arguments on this? I am interested, however the 10 pages of archives is quite a bit to wade through for someone who is new to this article. Thanks. :) --Scaife 12:45, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with you, however he is a member of the press from Denmark. I dunno, in his mind he might have a point insofar as distancing the rest of the press in Denmark from JP. I am in a quandry I see his point, and I believe that Wikipedia should remain NPOV, however in this instance I am not sure which is the most NPOV way to do, however I defer to consensus. --Scaife 12:54, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
barnstar
I award this Barnstar to Kyaa the Catlord for the work on Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy |
→AzaToth 19:14, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
*grin back*
I try to keep to discussing the article, but it gets hard sometimes. DanielDemaret 19:53, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
IPU
Man... now i wanna be both a flying spaghetti monsterist AND a follower of the invisible pink unicorn... i love this stupid cartoon discussion :) WookMuff 08:14, 8 February 2006 (UTC) sorry, Pastafarian ;) WookMuff 08:18, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Bah, call me Henry the VIII but i am gonna start my OWN IPU religion WookMuff 10:21, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
How do I explain changes?
I know how I would like to rewrite the article (no info deletion, just a bit of shuffling it to become more legible), but when I look at the "history", some edits display an explanation of what is changed. How do you do that?195.163.87.228 11:31, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
- There is an edit summary link below the text window, just add your reasoning in that. Like this is /*How do I explain changes?*/taadaa! Kyaa the Catlord 11:32, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy
Hello there. Let's try to avoid to get into a revert war.
I find it however essentially to inform about the fact that the paper (Jyllandsposten) who originally published the cartoons is right wing. First of all introducing any name or concept that we cannot expect people to know I belive some kind of presentation should be there. As a Dane (and a journalist) I find it important that people understand that the newspaper is not broadly representing Danes or the Danish press (even though it can be called mainstream). Noone with knowledge of the Danish press argues that it is anything but right wing.
So please argue why it is irrelevant or incorrect to present the paper as right wing.
Even though we have different views I believe things can be solved by discussions.
Best Bertilvidet 14:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- Please argue for the substance instead of attacking me for being biased. You dont know me. And was is relevant is your arguments - not against me, but that it should be incorrect or irrelevant to label the paper as right wing. So far 2 people argue for the labelling 2 people against. Bertilvidet 14:29, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
arrests of protesters - Danish Embassy
Matey, please don't let the dispute between Tom & I stop you from correcting errors or contributing in any way. Please! That's been going on forever & it's fairly mindless anyway. This is an ongoing story that I don't get too much time to contribute to. The changes made so far have been intelligent & progressive. I really welcome them. Go for it! Veej 02:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Islamophobia article
In the future, please discuss the reasoning for removing NPOV tags instead of using the old argument of someone who you don't agree with to be "trolling." 24.7.141.159 09:18, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- WTF indeed. I didn't touch islamophobia today. Perhaps you are imagining things? Kyaa the Catlord 12:43, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps you could explain this? [2] If it was not you...who? Islamophobia was the page? Is that the mistake?--Cberlet 20:31, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- Hmmm, interesting. I forgot I put weasel there. :P Still, that change WAS warranted and still is warranted. Kyaa the Catlord 08:56, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, that is Islamofascism, not Islamophobia. Please, if you're going to dredge up "evidence" against me, at least get the page correct. Kyaa the Catlord 08:58, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
Islamism article
Just to let you know that several other admins are now watching the Talk:Islamism to enforce some semblance of civilization, and MuslimsofUmreka's position isn't faring too well in the discussion thusfar. They've archived everything else due to WP:NPA violations without really looking at what people were saying, so your opinion about what had happened is no longer there. Hopefully it will be unlocked soon and we can repair the article.Timothy Usher 06:33, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Kyaa you should not try to change his tags or anything else he wants to do. this is his article not yours isnt that obvious by now.67.188.110.197
Stop ading the tags back on
I withdrew my side of the dispute. Also give a reason on the talk page about why the article is totally disputed when you put the tag up. Please stop being so immature. MuslimsofUmreka 01:35, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Dear Member off the KKK
Dear KKK member, I know that you hate Muslims and all but please stop messing with the Islamism article. I dont know why someone from colorado is so interested in the article. MuslimsofUmreka 01:53, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- You make me smile MOU. Kyaa the Catlord 02:01, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- I guess your a KKK member who doesnt realize that the whole world is laughing at you. MuslimsofUmreka 02:03, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- Indeed. I'm glad the whole world is concerned about me. Kyaa the Catlord 02:04, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- I dont think the yare concerned about you. I guess they find you and your humorous people to be clowns. I mean the things that the KKK do are just plain clownish. MuslimsofUmreka 02:08, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
By the way look at the talk page and you'll see the moderators said not too revert the article back to the old version. so stop playing games and get a life. I know in colorado there is not much too do. But please try too find something else to do with your time. MuslimsofUmreka 02:11, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- I have editting of wikipedia articles to do. Byebye MOU. Kyaa the Catlord 02:13, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Somehow I'm not altogether sure that Kyaa would care much for Japanese animation if they were a member of the KKK. (Much less talk to me, seeing as I'm a Filipino with a Japanese wiki handle!) *laughs riotously* Hang in there, Kyaa! And remember ... "Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit." Yes, even non-Muslims! -- Miwa 18:35, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Block for edit warring
I'm blocking you for 24 hours for edit warring on Islamism. Tom Harrison Talk 02:13, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- Is it not common practice not to block someone without warning them first? Further, I did not break 3rr and was in the midst of reporting MOU for NPA violations. This block is unjust. Kyaa the Catlord 02:20, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- Kyaa, I absolutely and wholeheartedly concur. I suspect the problem - and this is only a guess - that the admins don't have the time to look into the issues in detail. They see an edit war and say, oh, an edit war. I was quite surprised for example to learn that Katefan0 had not actually read the talk page prior to archiving, and I'm going to guess that Tom harrison didn't examine the context in which your reverts were done - first from inexcusable tag vandalism, and then from an intro that basically noone besides MOU accepts.
- Instead we have the rule of the playground: Billy hits Bobby, Bobby strikes back and both Billy and Bobby are suspended, simply because the judges have not the time and perhaps in some cases also not the interest to figure out who actually started the fight. The end result is a less-than-optimal response to violations of wikipedia guidelines - both the violator and those who try to stop him are punished.
- It is as you say incredibly unfair, and aside from upsetting you, also hurts wikipedia. Personally, I think you deserve a medal, and have told Katefan0 as much. The only reason admins don't have to get involved in such "edit warring" is because they can merely block problem users like MOU. To rebuke you for striving towards the same result with the only tools you have at your disposal is hypocrisy.Timothy Usher 06:01, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- Unfortunately the only redress I have for this is to wait for the block to expire or for a friendly admin to disagree with Tom's decision and free me. Kate won't, I've read her responses. For now, I'm sitting back and watching you clean house on Islamism while MOU is locked away. :D Kyaa the Catlord 06:04, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- I should like to do more house cleaning, and will do so either very soon or tomorrow - depends if I can stay awake. In the meantime I’ve been obliged to register my opinions on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding not only the Islamism debacle but also the Deuterium sock puppet of Hrana98/24.7.141.159/216.118.97.211 etc.- to see how low this guy has sunk, check out his new “user page” User:Deuterium/Timothy Usher. It's only a matter of time, I suspect, before he's posting my home address.
- And in case you're not already aware of this, Katefan0 has chosen to extend MOU's block for a week.Timothy Usher 07:24, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I saw that. Teehee. Thanks for your support. :D Kyaa the Catlord 08:06, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- And in case you're not already aware of this, Katefan0 has chosen to extend MOU's block for a week.Timothy Usher 07:24, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Socks
Thanks, I'll keep an eye on him. Tom Harrison Talk 14:11, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Kyaa, thanks for your message -- unfortunately most administrators don't have the power to perform a checkuser (which compares the IP's from which certain usernames edit), only a select set of administrators have that power (mostly members of the arbitration committee). If you suspect sockpuppetry you should request a checkuser here. Make sure you note that you believe this is someone evading his block, or it will probably be denied. · Katefan0(scribble)/poll 16:19, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
24.7.141.159 etc. socks
As you've had some contact with this user, have you any opinion about what I've posted on WP:ANI re Deuterium?Timothy Usher 07:35, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Islamism dispute tag
I removed the Islamism dispute tag on the assumption that you would not so object to the rewrite. If my assumption be incorrect, feel free to restore it.
Perhaps you will appreciate this page...go to User:Eastern section of the nation and click on Category:Wikipedia:Suspected sockpuppets of MuslimsofUmreka (something is weird about the link syntax here) 10:39, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Cool. :D I'm working tonight so I haven't had time to wiki much. Kyaa the Catlord 10:47, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Apologize
I apologize for the comments I left on your talk page last week. MuslimsofUmreka 04:22, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Godfrey Daniel cites
This fellow is adding all this "cited material", but when one reads the sources, they don't say what he claims them to; in fact the ones I just removed might be added to the real Al Jazeera citation (as opposed to the imposter site to which he linked) to prove that many Muslims do use this terminology and appreciate this distinction.
Considering Godfrey's recent contributions to Muhammad, and here, it's ironic that his POV in this article concurs with the one MOU and User247 have been pushing, that Islam mandates Islamism.Timothy Usher 21:23, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Islamists and anti-Muslim alarmists just happen to agree on these points.
As for User:User247, you can see him and his User:Hrana98 sock (more accurately, vice-versa) on WP:ANI, where User:User247 has earned his own section; also see the section on User:Deuterium.Timothy Usher 21:31, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
MOU is back
Despite these quotes...
- I will stay away from the Islamism page since there is no use to editing it anymore and I dont think it is that serious. So i'll promise i'll stay away from the page and the other editors from that page. I'll just do the positive contributions I had been doing earlier, before I saw the Islamism page. Please unblock me. I have learned my lesson and I will not do that anymore. MuslimsofUmreka 04:17, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- I have seemed to have lost any interest in editing this page. Very weird. I think its mostly because it brings out the worst in me. So I am officially dropping out from editing this page. MuslimsofUmreka 03:44, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
...MOU is back and has reverted all my changes.Timothy Usher 22:00, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Next one's on me.Timothy Usher 22:10, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
See User:ShawnCarter's contributions, only minutes after MOU had apologized to you.Timothy Usher 22:14, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
The funniest part is that he thought he could make a template (like the sockpuppet warning) simply by enclosing something in brackets.Timothy Usher 22:18, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
On Islamism, I doubt I have much influence with him. Unless someone can convince him of the virtues of consensus and incremental change, I think things will just have to take their course. Tom Harrison Talk 22:23, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- First off all, I would like to start off with that I am not user: ShawnCarter. All the other suckpoppets listed under my name are mine, except for InDaHoodSoGhetto who is someone else I asked to remove the templates. And also ShawnCarter is not a sockpuupet of mine. I do not know where that assumption came from. I know I said, I would stay away from the page, so I am gonna try to stick to that. MuslimsofUmreka 22:40, 21 April 2006 (UTC)