User talk:Rohirok: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 04:52, 2 July 2006

Welcome to the Wikipedia

Here are some links I thought useful:

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. The Wikipedia:Village pump is also a good place to go for quick answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Be Bold!

Sam [Spade] 14:22, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Baptist

I've added a little reply on Talk:Baptist re: Baptists as Protestants. I agree it was wishy-washy the way it was stated, but the truth of the matter was lurking just below. The article text was ALMOST correct, just without making clear statements as to why. --ABQCat 05:28, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

||

Thanks for your work on the Telecaster article! It's really strong now. Auto movil 14:02, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

List of Agnostics

Hello. I received your message on the above. Because you can assure that you will maintain the list, I will change my vote to keep and rename. Jtmichcock 14:05, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ArbCom Vote!

I wanted to thank my few "yes voters" in person...well, not in person, but at least contact you directly. Thank you for your vote, and for saying that you "liked me." It is appreciated. I love you.

Rowlan 15:57, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for voting!

Hello there! I wanted to thank you for taking the time to vote on my arbitration commitee nomination. Although it was not successful, I appreciate the time you spent to read my statement and questions and for then voting, either positively or negativly. Again, thank you! Páll ^{(Die pienk olifant)} 22:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great work on Bigsby

I was going to come back to it, I'd just restored the link to tremolo while I investigated what disregarding rhythm to rapidly produce pitches when musical notation calls for such a treatment was supposed to mean. I'm still not entirely sure. But you've addressed my concerns I think, and more. Andrewa 18:14, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Wow... an American Baptist (minister?) from Cincinnati who plays a brass instrument? I'm starting to wonder if I know you.

Atchius 00:10, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation Case: The Humanist papacy

Comments concerning this mediation case and the edit war leading up to it have been deleted. The matter is resolved.

About Ricardo Lagos in List of Agnostic

Absolutely it is confirmed ; Ricardo Lagos have been all his life AGNOSTIC. Everybody knows in Chile, he always has said it. Michelle Bachellet is agnostic too. I'am from Chile and I know what I write. Please it does not erase it!. (This unsigned comment was left by User:ANDRÉS NÚÑEZ)

Demkina RFM

Template:RFM-Filed

Note: I know you're not involved with the article anymore, but I thought you might possibly want to be involved in RFM. Or not. I just felt you should be notified as a possible party. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 18:33, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you're interested, I would appreciate your vote on the source dispute for the Natasha Demkina draft. Thanks! Dreadlocke 17:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for voting! I was hoping to use Pravda.RU as a very limited source per Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources_of_dubious_reliability, for certain things I can't find anywhere else, but we know happened - for instance the trip to Japan. The limited use of Pravda.RU is for items detailed in User:Dreadlocke/Sourced_from_Pravda.RU. I hope you might reconsider your rejection! Thanks again! Dreadlocke 04:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great idea on moving the lengthy source discussion to a debate section! I was thinking of doing the same thing. The voting section has gone way past what I intended and it's now just a big blobby mess... Dreadlocke 04:53, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He says one of the world's sleaziest tabloids is credible enough

Because I believe everyone should be accountable for their words and actions, I am copying here some of the debate from the Talk:Natasha_Demkina page. Rohirok is backing the efforts of pro-paranormal editors to use one of the world's sleaziest tabloids as a source of information for the article on Natasha Demkina a Russian teenager who claims to diagnose people's illnesses with her X-ray-like vision. The young woman's "career" was launched with sensationalistic stories in Pravda RU -- Russia's equivalent of the Weekly World News on steroids and acid. Here for example are some of today's "science" news headlines[1]:

"Humans to decipher the DNA of God and clone another Christ"

"Men with biggest reproductive organs all live in England"

"KGB ran secret laboratories to study extraterrestrial civilizations"

"US forces to attack heterosexual soldiers with homosexual bombs"

"Aliens probably build their bases on Earth’s seabed disturbing submarines"

"U.S. scientist says scores of UFOs fly around the Sun"

"Dragons came down to Earth from Sirius to share their wisdom with humans"

"Mankind descended from civilization of Atlanteans in the Arctic"

"Blind Russian mystic discerns colors by touch"

Other editors and I and are objecting to use of this sleazy tabloid as a Wikipedia source. Rohirok is arguing for its use along with three pro-paranormal editors:

"We have no reason to suppose that Pravda.RU is misrepresenting the claims that Demkina and her mother are making." Rohirok 03:12, 2 July 2006 (UTC) [2]

No reason? Above are nine very good reasons not to believe anything printed in Pravda RU, which pays its writers by the lie, not by the word. Rohirok's thoughtless words are going to haunt him for a long time, I suspect.Askolnick 04:52, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 77: / Line 77: @@
 Great idea on moving the lengthy source discussion to a debate section!  I was thinking of doing the same thing.  The voting section has gone way past what I intended and it's now just a big blobby mess... [[User:Dreadlocke|Dreadlocke]] 04:53, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
+==He says one of the world's sleaziest tabloids is credible enough==
+Because I believe everyone should be accountable for their words and actions, I am copying here some of the debate from the [[Talk:Natasha_Demkina]] page. Rohirok is backing the efforts of pro-paranormal editors to use one of the world's sleaziest tabloids as a source of information for the article on [[Natasha Demkina]] a Russian teenager who claims to diagnose people's illnesses with her X-ray-like vision. The young woman's "career" was launched with sensationalistic stories in Pravda RU -- Russia's equivalent of the Weekly World News on steroids and acid. Here for example are some of today's "science" news headlines[http://english.pravda.ru/society/anomal]:
+:"Humans to decipher the DNA of God and clone another Christ"
+:"Men with biggest reproductive organs all live in England"
+:"KGB ran secret laboratories to study extraterrestrial civilizations"
+:"US forces to attack heterosexual soldiers with homosexual bombs"
+:"Aliens probably build their bases on Earth’s seabed disturbing submarines"
+:"U.S. scientist says scores of UFOs fly around the Sun"
+:"Dragons came down to Earth from Sirius to share their wisdom with humans"
+:"Mankind descended from civilization of Atlanteans in the Arctic"
+:"Blind Russian mystic discerns colors by touch"
+Other editors and I and are objecting to use of this sleazy tabloid as a Wikipedia source. Rohirok is arguing for its use along with three pro-paranormal editors:
+"We have no reason to suppose that Pravda.RU is misrepresenting the claims that Demkina and her mother are making." Rohirok 03:12, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
+[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Natasha_Demkina#The_votes_along_with_voters.27_comments]
+No reason? Above are nine very good reasons not to believe anything printed in Pravda RU, which pays its writers by the lie, not by the word. Rohirok's thoughtless words are going to haunt him for a long time, I suspect.[[User:Askolnick|Askolnick]] 04:52, 2 July 2006 (UTC)