User talk:Jmabel/Archive 20

Uncle Tom's Cabin

I wanted to thank you for your excellent edits under the Tom Shows section of Uncle Tom's Cabin. It occurred to me recently that with a little polish this article could become a Featured Article candidate. To move the article toward this, I was going to expand the historic impact section and add in line footnotes a la Wikipedia:Footnote3. If you get a chance, do you think you could add the footnotes with page numbers to the Tom Shows section (I understand that most of the references are from Lotts book). If you don't have the time, I understand. Best, and thanks again. --Alabamaboy 13:19, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Misleading Summaries?

How were my summaries misleading? I clearly labeled my last edit "added vandalism." How is that misleading?

Punk

Hi Jmabal. I was a teenager in 1976, and the art attacks were VERY influential in the south of england and in London at the time. Thats why I added the art attacks to the page. I saw the slits, clash, ramones stranglers etc at around this time. (apparently User:Robin48gx)

Yeah Jmabal, I think they really should be in this first wave of punk along with the Lurkers, Screwdriver and Slaughter and the Dogs. For historical accuracy really.

Dacian language

Hope I explained something. The article needs more references, and some way of organizing the differing theories into a neat text has to be found. My habit of changing my posts on Talk Pages over time destroys the historical flow, but it's something I just do in many cases where a previous statement seemed to drift off topic or was inaccurate or not as accurate as it should be. I guess I'll try to refrain unless I find it necessary to revise comments. Peace, Decius 06:16, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

I might as well explain some of the motivation behind my edits: I don't believe that any one of those three theories mentioned in the article are correct, not even the Albanian one. For example, the Dacian word for ten, as extracted from Dekebalos, was Deke- (basically), from PIE *dekm-, 'ten'. The Albanian word for ten is dhjetë (also from PIE *dekm-). So, I'm making sure the article stays distant from accepting any of these theories being offered. Decius 06:53, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm planning on criticizing each one of those theories in the article, but just about all criticisms have to come from the references. The article to me is basically a pile of bullshit that I am impeded from editing properly due to lack of references, to be quite frank. Maybe you can offer some suggestions on how to deal with it. Decius 07:26, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Hatshepsut

If possible could you take a look at the Hatshepsut article, and see if you can support her FAC. Thanks. -JCarriker 10:13, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

indef blocking

Just wanted to let you know if you didn't already know about it that you can use {{indefblockeduser}} on the person's user and/or user talk page as just a large notice that the user has been blocked by an administrator and/or {{usernameblock}} for users who have been blocked for violation of the username policies, keep up the good work dealing with these innapropriate names. Jtkiefer ^{T | @ | C} ----- 05:22, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

I'll keep my eyes open in case this guy uses a sockpuppet to try to vandalize the Romania again. Don't hesitate to msg me if there's anything I can do to help. Jtkiefer ^{T | @ | C} ----- 05:27, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

Jacobins

I've reverted back to my cleanup, because It was a good job, so cool your attitude, stalker. I changed the offending ch-ch-ch- so you can cool it.Steve espinola 05:37, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

No dude...I'm having to go through all the archived cleanup months reverting your frivioulous detagging and other, more obfuscious, vandalism page by page by page. I'll give you one thing: You probably spent about as much time as me in the archived cleanup pages :-/ Thanks for making me redouble my efforts!

Btw. Huge thanks, Jmabel, for helping revert this mess...I took care of Jacobins page for you :-) — HopeSeekr of xMule (Talk) 17:04, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Just in case it's not clear, the paragraph that begins "No dude..." is also written by User:HopeSeekr of xMule, not by me. I'm much too old to use the word "dude" this way. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:09, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

Hatshepsut/Huh?

Hi Joe -- yes, that was a typo: I had originally typed "public domain or free use", then tried to change what I wrote to "non-fair use".

But in response to your point about "most images related to something this ancient", this was something I was surprised to learn once I started looking into the matter: there just isn't a lot out there, either encumbered by licenses or free. For example, I was only able to find a total of two illustrations relating to the Battle of Chalons: a map drawn in the last 30 years, & a rather fanciful engraving of Attila the Hun riding his horse on the battle field. It doesn't help that there is much scholarly uncertainty over exactly where this battle was fought.

In my experience, on one hand the vast majority of books prior to WWII are not illustrated; of those that are, most pre-1920 photographs are too poor in quality to be worth the trouble of scanning, & until some point in the mid-1950s most archeological objects & structures were illustrated by hand drawings -- which I feel qualifies them as original creations & are exempt from this loophole. I am forced to conclude that this is one of those cases where the Mickey Mouse Copyright Act is hampering free knowledge. But if you can prove me wrong about how many free images there are out there to be collected, please do so; maybe I've just had lousy luck. -- llywrch 18:00, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Well, I didn't mean to imply that there were none, but that I found it very difficult to accumulate more than a small number on any one specific individual or event, beyond the usual well-known few (e.g. Augustus, Caesar, Constantine the Great, etc.) If you have some titles for these turn-of-the century history books, please share & I'll start looking.

And I have been attempting to help fix this problem myself. I have an old family Bible from the 1890s with an unusually useful Teacher's Guide in the back with 120 pages of illustrations; You can see what I've been able to scan & upload (about 1/3 of the material) over on commons . -- llywrch 23:21, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Your suggestion sounds good; email me when you find the time, & we can take it from there. (Sorry; I should have responded sooner, but I've been preoccupied with other things, including a trip to Eastern Washington to a family gathering.) -- llywrch 05:49, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

rules to write external links

Hi Joe, My name is Emanuele Lombardi, I'm new to wikipedia and I would like to ask you a question about the way it works.

A few days ago (Aug 4th) I added to the Wiki page "Electronic_voting" an external link to my site http://www.electronic-vote.org where I write my reasons against electronic vote.

I wrote the following description of the site "We, the people, should pretend to use ballot papers since electronic elections are out of any democratic control". You have changed it to "www.electronic-vote.org. Site apparently the work of Emanuele Lombardi, according to [1]"

I'm not complaining about the change, but I would like to know which are the rules to follow when writing such things, just in case I'll edit some other Wiki pages in the future.

Thank you very much from Italy, Lele

(Apparently left by User:Lele 11 Aug 2005); I'm responding on that talk page, hope I have this right, but please sign your posts with ~~~~ -- Jmabel | Talk 00:17, August 11, 2005 (UTC))

Whitechapel

Hello Jmabel. Would you please check out Talk:Whitechapel? Thx. JDG 10:29, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

History of Seattle

There are several problems with the previous version:

1. Sections such as Railroad Rivalry with Tacoma and The Klondike Gold Rush are part of the early history of Seattle, therefore they should be umbrellaed under "Early history of Seattle". Before, this was not the case—they were given their own level two headings which indicated they were outside the early history of Seattle. The "see main" blurbs under such headings further gave the illusion these were isolated sections, when in reality they were linking to the same main article. For instance, History of Seattle before 1900 was linked to three times, only under different headings. This previous layout is redundant and confusing.
2. The information I stripped of such "see main" blurbs, previewing what was to come in that article, had little value in its previous presentation. The information in the hub article itself, History of Seattle, should be the preview of the main article, fleshed out in the brief summary paragraphs, not a few superficial taglines listed in one line. In its present state the article needs to work on this. For instance, "Relations with the natives" seems to be the largest section of History of Seattle before 1900, yet in History of Seattle it is summarized in maybe a sentence or two. On the other hand "The Klondike Gold Rush" has its own heading in History of Seattle, yet its respective section in History of Seattle before 1900 is quite small. If sections of History of Seattle concisely summarizes the important info of the main article being linked to, then the user will have an effective preview of what's to come, trumping a few words strung together next to the main article link.
3. The {{seemain}} template is the standard way of linking to main articles on a hub/overview page like History of Seattle.

In short, the article needs improvement (i.e. what I outlined in #2). I think my changes are a first step in that direction, and therefore should not be reverted. -- jiy^Talk 09:21, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

Please look at

I recently, nearly joined the exodus of regualr contributors, but have decided instead to reduce my edits to admin and mediator activities. However I am considering becoming a regular contributor again, if my concerns can be at least partially addressed. Please review and participate in the this. It will only take a small amount of your time. Thanks. -JCarriker 12:40, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

Understood. Drafting the the charter will take an effort you probably don't have time for. However, alleviating the type of stress your experiencing is the type of thing Esperanza will be geared for. When the charter complete, try stopping by and we'll see if we can't find someone willing take on some your work load, thus clearing time for you to write and translate. Thanks. - JCarriker 21:25, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

again about Electronic_voting

Hi Joe, thanks for the explanation about the external link label I wrote.

I simply meant to show the basic idea of the linked site just like the label of the following link:

• Internet Voting vs. Large-Value e-Commerce — Why securing voting is not the same thing as securing financial transactions via the Internet (Bruce Schneier)

Anyway, do you think the following label is acceptable?

• electronic vote & Democracy, A study about the relations between electronic vote and Democracy (Emanuele Lombardi)

Apart the label of the external link I would like to modify the following period of the Overview:

"By contrast, in a paperless system, voters must have faith in the accuracy of the counting software."

I would change it into:

"By contrast, in a paperless system, voters must have faith in the accuracy, honesty and security of the whole electoral apparatus (people, software and hardware) because without tangible proofs of electors’ will, no democratic control is possible over elections."

Do you think it is an acceptable modification? Would it be necessary to define "democratic control" in a new Wiki page?

Thank you very much from Italy,

Lele Talk 12:50, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Wilde

I have now replied to your comments on Oscar Wilde talk (you may have already seen by now). I hope that answers your question. Iron Ghost 12:57, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Changes to Pat Robertson

My writing was ambiguous. Thanks for catching it. SDC 19:12, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

The African Grove and racist vandalism

I've known of the African Grove theater company since, I suppose, the early '70s (I attended Howard University, and there's a theater there named after Ira Aldridge), but that's about it. I seem to also recall a play by, perhaps, August Wilson that dealt with the company and its trevails and its eventual destruction by a rival white theater owner. I'm pretty sure it was an August Wilson play, because he later -- or about the same time -- founded an institute or foundation named after the Grove in New York, or Philly, or Newark (somewhere). I don't know what happened to it, though. I haven't read the article yet -- I'm really pressed for time this week -- but I'll get to it. I'm glad you're on it.

And, no. There's really nothing that can be done about the intermittent vandalism. It's annoying, sometimes lewd and disgusting, but I'm not going to waste my time with it. (I thought I was done with the dumb white-boy gross-out pranks when I left high school, but, alas, "contributors" like Scatboy and the pink pr*ck exhibitionist have proven me wrong.) Wikipedia has proven itself utterly useless in such matters, even when the users are registered. (These vandals are just morons with too much time on their hands and precious few active brain cells.) But thanks for asking. Peace. :) deeceevoice 11:06, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Second tagline poll - please follow this link

(This is already announced on Pump and Rfc but I'm adding it here because you contributed to the originating pump discussion.) Thanks! -- Sitearm | Talk 05:03, 2005 August 16 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article African Grove, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently-created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Jayjg rfc

Hi: Please see: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jayjg. Thanks. IZAK 03:35, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Anti-war

From your user page and edit history I thought you might be interested in joining the new wikiproject; WikiProject Anti-war. As you no doubt know, anti-war movments and ideas have had a massive influence on world politics esspecially since the launch of the "war on terror" and the global reaction to it. Events like the Febuary 15th biggest ever global day of demo's are historic in and of themselves and well deserving of more attention then the currently recive on wikipedia. Also the project will aim to get rid of any redundent repeted information through unifiy the different anti-war pages. Some right-wingers as well as lefties have allready shown interest in the project so hopefully we can achive ballance and NPOV. Hope you chouse to become involved. --JK the unwise 15:30, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for joining. Don't worry about being to active. I actually think that wikiprojects are a good way to maximise what you can do even when you don't have much time as you can be pointed towards tasks without having to search for them yourself. I am looking to have a list of quick tasks on the page as well as the rather large and vage big ones currently listed.--JK the unwise 17:08, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

I just read your additions to Wikipedia:WikiProject Anti-war. Did you see my comments on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anti-war? Also, I would recommend keeping films/books/etc. in different lists. Your thoughts? --Tony Hecht 08:31, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

IDRIVE

You showed support for This week's Improvement Drive. This week Napoleonic Wars was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help…

Nösnerland

I noticed you had done some work on the Ţara Bârsei page, so you might be interested in the Nösnerland article I recently started with the Burzenland article as a base. The Nösnerland was the other area of early settlement of the Transylvania Saxons. Any additional information (or relevant articles) would be appreciated. Would you happen to be able to find out the proper Romanian/Hungarian names for the region? Olessi 20:41, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

John Fader

Hi - Do you happen to know user:John Fader in real life? He hasn't edited since May. I think he was one of the more reasonable folks around. Just wondering what happened. -- Rick Block (talk) 14:18, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

Kissinger

can ya do me a favor and help me out with this when you have time. i'm asking because unfortunately despite my pleas and anguish i was banned for a year after a much-delayed ArbCom regarding sockpuppetry/vandalism in Dec. '04 and "POV unsourced edit warring" early this year. i've been trying to be more compromising now but no one's seemed to really pay attention to the kissinger article and as i'm leaving in 6 days i'd really appreciate it if you could help me work in a few last changes since i'm not gonna be using this project after friday.

thanks. J. Parker Stone 04:40, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

thank you thank you thank you. sorry for the long response on Talk i kinda rambled, i'll clarify the main points if it's too convoluted. btw, when are your work hours -- you only available in the evening? i'm on PST. J. Parker Stone 09:18, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

also i made a similar sandbox a while back at Talk:Ronald Reagan if you get time to look at that. J. Parker Stone 04:44, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Here. sorry bout that. almost done with a rewrite of the Kissinger article as well. J. Parker Stone 06:39, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

lol sorry it's just these two articles that are really important to me and i want to get done before i go to college because they're a mess. though i completely understand and apologize for bugging you. might contact 172 about this. J. Parker Stone 06:52, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

hey i appreciate the kind words on Talk:Henry Kissinger man. J. Parker Stone 07:50, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Pretty cool copy edit

Thanks for the review on Augustan drama. What's kind of interesting to me, though, is that certain tooth jarring edits made by some copy editors are now being undone by other editors, while I'm trying to have no preference (e.g. "trend-setting," which is what I wrote, was copy edited to "trendsetting," which is legitimate but unlovely, and then reversed by you to "trend-setting," which is my preference to start with). You're the first to do some serious sentence combining and clause trimming, and yours were perceptive and proper. Very cool. Thanks. (Now, if people would actually vote on it on FAC.) Geogre 11:33, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Delete Criticism

In the discussion board on the Stalin article I posted a claim that Stalin may have been of Jewish ancestry. You responded by saying that other users might want to look at my contribution list because in some of my contributions I had made far fetched claims without offering any proof for them. I have now eliminated all of my contributions to Wikipedia except for my contributions to the discussion on the Stalin article and to the discussion on the Barry Goldwater article, so could you please delete your quote on the Stalin article discussion "I suggest that you may want to look at this user's contributions". I have already asked you in the discussion on the Stalin article to do this and you still have not done it. FDR | Talk 11:25 PM, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Instead of crossing out the "I suggust you may want to look at this user's contributions" comment why not delete the comment altogether." FDR | Talk 11:45 PM August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Rewording of Link

Thanks for your help in rewording the Rosemary Kennedy link. 24.147.97.230 16:18, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

A translation request

Could you llok at Wikipedia:Translation into English#Portuguese-to-English at the request I've posted and tell me if it's complete tosh or not? I would be very grateful. Cheers. -- Francs2000 | Talk 20:41, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Delete

I am still sorry for deleting your comment on the Stalin and I will not attempt to do this in the Barry Goldwater article. But since I have retracted and deleted all of my contributions to the Goldwater article discussion forum could you perhaps consider deleting the entire section I started "12:Conspiracy Theories". It is of course entirely up to you whether or not to do this,just a suggestion. FDR | Talk 6:47 AM, August 24, 2005

reference cited in ssnp article

i found the reference cited in the ssnp article at the following address

http://past.thenation.com/doc/20050103/irwin

and it does not state "and its ideology drew heavily on the European fascists of the period, especially Benito Mussolini. "

it is an article about a lebanese poet (adonis) and the only refernce to fascism in it is "The charismatic Sa'ada put forward quasi-fascistic arguments for the future destiny of a Greater Syria "

? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Objktv (talk • contribs) 25 Aug 2005

SSNP = Syrian Social Nationalist Party - Jmabel | Talk 21:53, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

"fictional plant"

Please consider removing this misinformation from your user page, or at least explicitly mark it as a hyperbole. Some gullible people actually believe it. -- Naive cynic 21:37, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

What are you objecting to? Are you claiming that Ents are not fictional? -- Jmabel | Talk 21:42, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

I fear I'm not hard-core enough to claim so. :) I'm referring to the fact, that, despite their appearance, ents are not plants. -- Naive cynic 21:52, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

I see. Yes, I will edit accordingly. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:55, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. I thought you used it as a rhetorical figure only. -- Naive cynic 22:01, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Dickens and Juba

Jmabel, sorry for my tardiness in reply. My source for the Dickens/Juba connection is unfortunately a book I had out of a public library I no longer have access to. I have it on my to-do list to stop at my current public library on the off chance they have it, but I haven't yet been able to make that trip (you may have noticed in other Talk statements that I am extremely ill). You can go ahead and remove the statement from the Master Juba article if you wish, and I will change it back if and when I get ahold of that book. JDG 03:18, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Age of Discovery

Thanks for the typo correction. As for the content, I believe it is correct. The meridian set by the Tordesilles treaty cuts the American continent more or less in half. (i don´t know the exact longitude). That's why the Portuguese got Brazil (which technically crosses the meridian anyway), and the Spanish the South and North American west coast, plus central America. The remaining area was the Pacific. This is the reason why the Spanish presence in Africa and Asia was so limited.--BBird 14:25, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

My question is mainly about whether "west coast" is correct, as against just "western part". I realize that the lines of ultimate settlement don't line up neatly with the treaty, but both Argentina and Venezuela are both on the east coast of South America, and many areas settled by the Spanish are hardly "coastal" (Bolivia, Ecuador). -- Jmabel | Talk 16:45, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

I think you are right -- western part is more accurate. I will ammend accordingly. thanks.--BBird 18:28, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Assistance with African American Literature needed

If you have a second, could you check out a discussion I'm involved in at Talk:African American literature. One editor has an issue with how African American literature is structured b/c the article describes Black literature while following the history and politics of African Americans. To him, bringing history and politics into a literature article is wrong b/c the article should totally focus on art, form, aesthetics. I've already pointed out that Black lit is tied in with the history and experiences of Black people in this country. I also showed that Literature of the United States, English literature, Tamil literature and so on follows the basic sociological and historical framework that this article uses. This editor has made very few edits to the English Wikipedia (he is German) and most people--through the FAC process and in comments now--have agreed that the article is currently set up very well. However, another user has suggested mediation and such, even though I have agreed with almost everything the other editor has suggested (with the exception of a total rewrite and restructuring of the article). I'm about to go crazy over this. I mean, this other editor has contributed nothing to the article except to say he hates it and now I'm expected to agree with everything he says? Any help is appreciated.--Alabamaboy 01:26, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Nixon & enemies list

Hi. What, out of curiosity, happened to this category? Do you know? Is the vote for deletion archived someplace? I can't find it. Thanks. --Cberlet 17:20, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

War of the Pacific

Hello Jmabel! It's me, Messhermit. I'm not available too much time for Wiki during the next few weeks (Paperwork in the US), and I really appreciate the way that you are taking care of this article. Apperantly, some Chilean User is attempting to push a nationalistic POV, ignoring the work that some other users have done to improve the quality of the article in question.

One more thing, I believe that the same user could have send me a non-friendly email, warning me not to post on Wiki. I'm not 100% sure, but please help me to achieve a NPOV article. Cheer! Messhermit 01:56, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Category talk:Ashkenazi Jews

Hi Joe: Do you think it's reasonable to "categorize" all the Ashkenazi Jews etc. on Wikipedia? See Category talk:Ashkenazi Jews. Thanks. IZAK 05:36, 31 August 2005 (UTC)