Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:13, 18 November 2012

User talk:Sayerslle/Archive#1

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Extremadura campaign, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fascist Italy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Baker Street (song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alienation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

AfD and PROD notifications

Hi Sayerslle. Back in November, you got either an AfD or PROD notification, and it was during one of the template testing project's experiments. If you could go here and leave us some feedback about what you think about the new versions of the templates we tested (there are links on the page), that would be very useful. (You can also email me at swallingwikimedia.org if you want.) Thanks! Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 22:45, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Concerning your discussion

Ok i've just read a discussion you had with a user of the view that 'imperialism, slavery and semitism' are White Christian discoveries. I mentioned on the Dickens talk page that there was an excessive non white emphasis by the user which is way out of proportion than what you would find in a book on him (for example the 'Franklin incident' section is longer tnan 'Later Years', and has a lot content that has nothing to do with Dickens). Another editor posited that the article was being used as a soapbox to advance a personally held political position. Are you aware of any other literary article on wikipedia where politicizing to this extent has occured? Harrison 1979 (talk) 00:09, 23 February 2012 (UTC

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Foreign involvement in the Spanish Civil War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page PCE (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Response

In response to this message that you left on my talk page: You should do a bit of reading in the article loaded language. Just because the BBC uses a word doesn't mean it isn't a loaded term. And we can't use loaded terms here because of WP:NPOV. Furthermore, I would like to point out that using ad hominems is a sign of weakness. Accusing me of "loving Assad and Gaddafi" only shows that you've got no substantive arguments to dispute my edits. - TaalVerbeteraar (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Wp uses the language that is widely/commonly used in the real world press/media - not scum language. the BBC has more kudos than scum . all your edits are scum edits imo. not very eloquent but there you are.Sayerslle (talk) 16:54, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 8

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Foreign involvement in the Spanish Civil War (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Partido Comunista de España

Red Terror (Spain) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Basque Country

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Complaint about your edits at WP:AN3

See Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#Three users reported by User:Izidorscats (Result: ). You may respond there if you wish. EdJohnston (talk) 21:47, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Blocked

Per "all your edits are scum edits imo. not very eloquent but there you are" on this talk page. You also called another editor a 'fucking moron vandal.' EdJohnston (talk) 21:55, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

who is igorfrom. i dunno. i still feel, and i wasn't going to keep on , it is best as far as posible , (and i like this quote from dante ) to ' go your way, and let the people speak' ..Sayerslle (talk) 12:39, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Jean Simmons

Re the comment you made in your recent change on the Jean Simmons page, Pascal was a director, Rank was the production company. Pascal spotted Jean and probably organised the contract but the contract would have been with Rank -- SteveCrook (talk) 09:09, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

al-Assad

I did not intend to offend you with my opinion about a particular paper or UK papers in general. I read many UK papers each day online including the BBC and The Daily Telegraph. My intent was to be objective as possible about the article and sources and to steer clear of subjective sources. I have thought more about my stance on the email situation and have started a new section to discuss a new approach to them so that we can include more content that you would like to see added. I invite you to participate. Sincerely, Veriss (talk) 04:01, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Peter Cruddas

Fast work! This is why I love Misplaced Pages. Thank you. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 23:03, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. It's listening to Radio 5 live too much really while sitting at my desk. Sayerslle (talk) 23:10, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

with no blood on him

Sorry! I accidentally deleted that part! I meant only to remove the analysis. Sorry for that! Gaijin42 (talk) 01:58, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 9

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Glued to the Box (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Mantegna, Peter Marshall, Andrew Gardner, The Bell, Flamingo Road and The Borgias (TV series)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:27, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Red Terror Spain

I don't necessarily have a problem with inclusion of your recent edit in the article. I don't think it belongs in the lede, though. If you want to keep it POV neutral and place it in an appropriate part of the article, I think we'd have agreement regarding the contribution. Otherwise, it is still contested. If you want to push it, I feel pretty confident it won't remain in the lede, it doesn't meet the standards for inclusion there. Mamalujo (talk) 16:30, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Qu'est ce que c'est? a message - oh no - no agreement ever - "its Dog Eat Dog - - I'm just waking up/The dove is in the dungeon/ and the white-washed hawks/ pedal hate and call it love/Dog eat dog/ Holy hope in the hands of/snakebite evangelists and racketeers -It's dog eat dog, ain't it Flim-Flam man?Dog eat dog, you can lie,/cheat,skim,scam/beat 'em any way you can/" -Joni Mitchell dontcha know - no agreement avec vous, ever - Sayerslle (talk) 00:09, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't know how they think they are serving the interests of peace, the Catholic Church, by what they do. Anyone who is genuinely seeking spiritual nourishment are put off by any hint of lying. Why should they believe in things that cannot be seen when the "evangelists" lie about things that can be be verified? Yt95 (talk) 16:13, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes. I agree - and I keep thinking of more Joni Mitchell lyrics I'm listening to at the moment , when thinking about certain figures in history -'We're no flaming angels/And he's not heaven sent/How can he speak for the Prince of Peace/ When he's hawk-right-militant ...'Sayerslle (talk) 19:52, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Funny that, I've been thinking about buying a Joni Mitchell cd this past while. The last album I have of her is "The Hissing of the Summer Lawns" on vinyl from the 70's so I was thinking of getting a sort of greatest hits type collection. Any recommendations? Yt95 (talk) 01:34, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

You know i was looking on Amazon yesterday because listening to Dog eat Dog - which has several tracks i think are brilliant (Good Friends with Michael McDonald especilly) and I thought I'd like to get the next two of her Geffen albums Chalk Mark in a Rain Storm and Night Ride Home because I don't know those- What sparked my listening to Dog Eat Dog again was Whitney Houstons untimely death and the 1985/86 era came back to me when I listened to 3 records over and over -Whitneys debut album, Dog Eat Dog by Joni Mitchell,and Pat Benatar's Tropico album -all summer, must have been 1986, - so I'm not up on the arc of Joni Mitchells entire career really I'm afraid- I Love Hejira too though, and Coyote which just evokes Canada for me for some reason though I was only there for two weeks a long time ago - I'd look for a greatest hits album that had 'Woodstock', 'Good Friends', and 'Coyote', on it - or get Dog eat Dog and Hejira... ! Sayerslle (talk) 03:09, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I especially like late sixties West Coast music which I also associate Joni with - an old hippy who thinks still thinks there is something in the peace and love ethos so maybe I will start there and work forward. I used to have a rare single of her singing "Circle Game" with James Taylor which I really liked as a kid, though maybe one circle is enough if there is something better. Imagine stuck in wikipedia purgatory for ever! Yt95 (talk) 04:08, 12 May 2012 (UTC) But I just looked up the lyrics "There'll be new dreams maybe better dreams and plenty Before the last revolving year is through" so it's not on continuous repeat mode, whew. p.s I see you were born in Headingly. I lived for two years just outside Headingly and really liked the area, great people. Yt95 (talk) 04:37, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't know 'circle game' - i like the look of some of her album covers, Clouds for example, and vinyl records do sound better really dont they - i'm glad you liked Headingley - again, like with Joni, my knowledge is very circumscribed - my family left Yorkshire when i was 2 - mum and I were both born in Leeds by chance, her dad was a gardener working at Harewood House for a bit and my dad worked for the Post office there for a few years only - i've looked at the place using google street view out of curiosity - what a thing for nostalgia google street view is -ive checked out nearly all the places i once knew - have you seen theres a new book out in June 'Eugenio pacelli in the view of scholarship' by peter pfister - could be interesting - i followed a link you gave elsewhere to Paul o'Shea's site and he said he'd changed his mind about Cornwell's work - i wonder why thats come about? - i'd like to get o'shea's book too but i still havent finished Cornwell and Gerard Noels books about pius. so many books!Sayerslle (talk) 19:13, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I was listening in the library today to Circle Game on Youtube

I think you're probably right about O'Shea's reservations - and the title- one can see it might have been chosen to sell copies - I'm reading 'unearthing francos legacy' at the moment and paul prestons essay in it - he writes about the language used by the Right - of the need to exterminate vermin kind of thing - and from sources like Angel herreras 'ascoiation catolica nacional de propagandistas' that in the Asturias for eg the left wing workers 'deserved to be punished by exposure to Moorish atrocities' - that it was ironically just that 'the Moorishness' ie. the barbarsim of the working class left deserved the Moors - it is a kind of racial inferiority being asigned the left - and some of the Carlist language 'there are moving around spain complete teams of creatures injected with rabies - ' -i think i'm less inclined than you to think the anti-Semitism and anti-leftism was not at all stained by ideas of racial inferiority/superiority - and pius - i was very struck by Cornwells book when he reported the letter pacelli wrote back to Rome on revoutionary Munich - full of disgust , physical disgust , for the revolutionaries - whatever else, it all seems millions of miles from the kind of things Jesus would have written Sayerslle (talk) 17:58, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

The principle was that once a Jew was baptised they ceased to be a Jew whereas with the Nazis once a Jew always a Jew, albeit a baptismal certificate for a converted Jew (the Church called them "Non-Aryan Catholics") did at times bring some protection. I think you are right about language and acts we now call racist being commonly employed in the past even by official organs of the Church, and even the Popes. I think a lot of this is the principle of "otherness" at work, probably at a sub-conscious level. The effect of it is to dehumanise the target group and make them worthy of hate. Hitler more than once said to women at Bertesgarten, when they asked for mercy towards the Jews, words to the effect "you must learn to hate, hate, hate". He probably worked on the assumption that unity and communion founded on love was all very well but human beings have often shown a greater capacity to rally around the flag of hate. This happened on both sides of the Spanish Civil War. At the present time there is worry in Europe about the rise of Neo-Nazi parties in the wake of economic woes and how there is a distant echo of what happened in Germany after the Wall St crash led to an exodus of money to cover the calls of the speculators in the U.S. Hitler was the "strong man" that many turned to then but look what happened. I never used Cornwalls book for anything on wikipedia because I have many of the secondary scholarly sources he used for his own work. Though Ronald Rychlak rightly noted the errors, it didn't stop him using Cornwell's book extensively in his own work as a reliable secondary source. (his own book certainly isn't free of issues) Oddly enough it was Cornwell's book that showed me in a couple anecdotes what I took to be maybe Pacelli's true self under all the pomp and circumstance associated with the papacy - a boy. This reminds me of somebody you like. I was talking to a Cistercian several years ago who recalled when Malcolm visited his abbey with a TV crew in 1960's. At that time it was a strictly silent order but when the cameras stopped rolling Malcolm, like a naughty schoolboy, was laughing and kept pushing him to tell him swear words in sign language! Yt95 (talk) 20:21, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

a boy - Yes, i know what you mean . I wonder if that abbey was Sancta Maria Abbey, Nunraw? I ve seen excerpts from a visit he made there -, he made an excellent film about a trip to Lourdes too around that time 1963-1966 ish -, - though I have to say I think he lost it toward the very end - i saw a couple of months ago the debate he ahd with John Cleese and Michael Palin about the Life of Brian , and I thought John Cleese made Malcolm seem out of time really - he lost his good judgment I think toward the very end. Still love him though. Sayerslle (talk) 20:42, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, his friend Richard Ingrams thought the same. I think part of the reason is maybe that Malcolm had a kind of very free lifestyle in his early years and, as happens with so many who undergo some kind of conversion experience, he flipped in the opposite direction in his later years. I think there is a bit of the fundamentalist in most people, veering off one way, course correction, veering off in the other direction until some kind of middle of the road state is established? I think Ingrams also said that towards then end, when in his dotage, he thought he expressed anti-Semitic sentiments. I don't know what he said but maybe when the brain has trouble remembering recent patterns of thoughts and memories the old ones still remain. He came through the thirties when anti-Semitic sentiments were nothing unusual. Yt95 (talk) 21:30, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I read the Ingrams biography when it cam e out - I think i do remember vaguely something about anti-Semitic remarks when his mind was going - - its true that the 1930s was a very strange terible time - even George Orwell surprised me a bit when i read 'down and Out in paris and london' , when hes tramping and he'll write something like (can't remember exatly) ' a grubby looking man, a Jew...' its like it was in the air they all breathed -disastrous - it is disgusting to see parties like Golden Dawn in greece now - is there a fundamentalist in most people? - i remember watching good old john betjeman being asked near the end of his life by jonathan stedall 'is there anything you feel absolutely sure about john?' and he hesitated, thought and then said ' no...i don't think there is - i wouldn't like to lay down the law about anything.' probably the middle of the road is the most mature position, perhaps that was lacking in the 1930s - not enough people willing to stand up for imperfect democracies because of utopian chimeras.Sayerslle (talk) 22:11, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I kind of take it that "faith" involves a kind of uncertainty otherwise it wouldn't be faith. But even people with no belief in other than the material can be believe they have a truth that other people must accept as the history of the 20th century shows. Maybe it more to do with a personality trait, excercising control over other people, power lust and all that. Religion and science just becomes the vehicle for something which is far more banal. Yt95 (talk) 22:42, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

personality trait - oh gawd - the end of 'Dockery & Son' by Philip Larkin comes to my mind ;

Life is first boredom, then fear/ Whether or not we use it, it goes/ and leaves what something hidden from us chose/And age, and then the only end of age.

some are born to seek to exercise control - others to be mystics, magicians, fools - archetypes - free will? Sayerslle (talk) 01:01, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Often thought about it but no answer, cue Moody Blues "Question" Yt95 (talk) 14:24, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Asma al-Assad

Don't use edit summaries like this one. You should have stopped at WP:NOTAFORUM.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:36, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I suggest you alter your editing habits. If you continue to give edit summaries like the above, and like this one , you will be reported for personal attacks. Meowy 01:44, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

the substance of the edit summary - bias. am i 100% wrong? Sayerslle (talk) 09:00, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

p.s , from cursory glance at your talk, meowy - 'probably you had never even heard of syria until last year, but now, all whipped up with fake indignation fueled by whatever propaganda news channel you watch - leave wikipedia alone.' bloody hell,- and you'd report me. ah well - all part of life's rich pageant i suppose. Sayerslle (talk) 10:15, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Sayerslle, the immediate matter here concerns your abuse of (and insertion of abuse into) article edit summaries. You have done it many times - it is not just limited to the two examples cited here. This is not what edit summaries are for. Meowy 17:06, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Shia/Alawite

Re: this , I've got no objection to either phrasing myself, but it seems redundant to me to say "Shia/Alawite men from Shia/Alawite villages"--I think that's why another editor altered it originally. Thanks for the addition, btw. That Channel 4 News source is one of the most helpful added to the article yet. Khazar2 (talk) 22:01, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

I think for some readers 'shabiha from shia/alawite villages ..' could mean - the men were not either shia or alawite, but they came from those villages -' I just think spelling it out, as it is in the source, is the better idea - channel 4 News - yes, it is generally pretty excellent i think and has been for ages. Sayerslle (talk) 22:06, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Close paraphrasing

I wanted to give you a heads-up that this edit appears to be nearly verbatim from the source, and I've had to adjust it accordingly. Please remember that Misplaced Pages policy on close paraphrasing and copyright violation mean that we have to somewhat rewrite content that we're adding, rather than reproducing sentences verbatim. No harm done, but please be careful with this in the future. Cheers, and thanks for your edits, Khazar2 (talk) 04:27, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

copyright - nightmare - you sent me to the wrong page - please learn about disambiguation. Sayerslle (talk) 06:52, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean; it appears to me both links are correct. Cutting and pasting from a text without putting the text in quotation marks is straight-up, if minor, copyright violation--"even inserting text copied with some changes can be a copyright violation if there's substantial linguistic similarity in creative language or structure (this can also raise problems of plagiarism)."-- hence the link. As I said, no harm done, but please do be careful in the future. Khazar2 (talk) 14:09, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

grrrr - well when I click on CLOSE - i get a page about Closing discussions - I dont care about minor copyright violations - if theres a transgression, just delete the edit - my experience at other times is that when editors have departed from simple texts from books and papers to use their own creative language they have sometimes departed also from the meaning of what they were seeking to impart from the chosen text - if you get my drift. in any case - as you have said - no harm done. far more important is npov imo - - some have tugged my coat ( phrase I like nicked from Danny Baker ) to tell me they have had to remove a photo or two - like one of malcolm muggeridge from the homage to catalonia article - if they hadn't bothered it seems to me absolutely nothing would have happened - still, . Sayerslle (talk) 15:00, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I see. My mistake. And FWIW, I agree with you that it's a very difficult line to walk between being overly faithful to the source and not faithful enough; I struggle with it in my own editing, too. But do be careful about verbatim text--that's definitely on the wrong side of that narrow line! Thanks again for all your work at Houla massacre... Khazar2 (talk) 15:36, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. You do seem very even-handed in your editing on the article. that ANNA source - User:A Quest for Knowledge translated their raison d'etre at the reliable sources noticeboard -thinks it likely its an 'advocacy site', 'a group blog', it has a worldview that determines how it will report events - - Channel 4 news, they go in , and report as they find, no pre-determined script - thats the difference - thats why i thought meco was worth fighting. Sayerslle (talk) 16:22, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

3RR

Your recent editing history at Tel Aviv shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. The page has now been protected, please discuss on the talk page rather than edit warring. - filelakeshoe 20:23, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Sayerslle, what was the point of all that? If an editor feels strongly that something belongs in an article but there are other editors that disagree, that's what the Discussion page is for.—Biosketch (talk) 20:28, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

what was the point of that? i dunno - sorry i disturbed your tourist brochure style. taré Sayerslle (talk) 20:35, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

South tel aviv

this is not racism like the world think !. the problem is that the origianl citizens of south tel aviv is leaving there homes becouse of these African migrant workers. the residents of tel aviv doמ't mind the fact that are a migrant workers from 40 countries. HOW MANY PEOPLE DID ENGLAND + CHINA + AMERICA WAS DEPORTED  ? .... allways israel is the bad guy ?! ....... intresting . פארוק (talk) 06:49, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Personal attacks

I advise you not to refer to my edits as "utter lying garbage" and accusing me of censorship, as you did here. You know full well that such behaviour may result in being blocked from editing Misplaced Pages, and I will report your misconduct if it happens again. - TaalVerbeteraar (talk) 09:41, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

go for it. Sayerslle (talk) 09:57, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Notification of Administrators' noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Abusive language by User:Sayerslle. Thank you. - TaalVerbeteraar (talk) 11:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Reply

You very well know when I said what I said I was methaphorical and not lying. When I said dozens I ment numereous (you in fact reverted 5 times). And I did not accuse you specifically of reverting dozens of times. I was describing what an edit war is in practice, not that you personally reverted dozens of times. You were being too literal. I was trying to make a point that edit warring is not required when we can discuss the issue and reach a consensus. I don't know what is the reason for this behavior. You need to assume good faith from other editors if you wish to work as a team in the effort to positively contribute to Misplaced Pages. But since you are now even accusing me of being a lier, highly uncivil, than I think I have nothing more to discuss with you. In the future, ask for an administrators/arbitors opinion. Good night! EkoGraf (talk) 21:36, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

you want to look up metaphorical in a dictionary. you exaggerated to paint me in a bad light. Sayerslle (talk) 21:44, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Why would I want to make you look bad? I don't even know you friend. EkoGraf (talk) 22:51, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

thats true. i'm going off to read Peter Mansfield (historian) on the middle east - 20 years ago he wrote; "what the Arab world urgently needs is more democracy, wider political participation and much greater respect for human rights."Sayerslle (talk) 23:36, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

syria

Christians were reportedly present in early demonstrations in Homs but stopped participating in them when Islamist Salafi slogans were proclaimed.

do you think you fairly represented the referenced material with this edit? I couldnt find in the BBC article the emphasis you put on the material here at all. is that because I'm missing something or is it your POV editing? the article says everyone walked off in solidarity with the Xtians and as far as I could see didnt say they stopped participating full stop at allSayerslle (talk) 21:32, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Why do you attribute those edits to me? FunkMonk (talk) 21:37, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

because in the edit history it isnt there after you edited on 2 march and then it is there after you edited on 4 march. still, a revealing answer in its way i guess. says it allSayerslle (talk) 22:19, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Read whatever you want into it, who cares, seems I must have mixed up different articles or something, it was months ago. FunkMonk (talk) 22:25, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

i read into it you are a liar and a twister for your POV - you got 'mixed up' - yeah right. fuck off. Sayerslle (talk) 09:22, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

why dont admins like wilkins confront twisting liars like this bloke rather than hastle over civility crimes - as if integrity isnt way more important? Sayerslle (talk) 09:24, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

are you allowed to censor my talk page? please don't - Sayerslle (talk) 10:39, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Sayerslle (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

for telling a liar to fuck off - who said 'who cares' about misrepresenting source material, i get a months ban. that is way excessive imo. and wrongheaded - admins semm to prioritise 'civility' over integrity - very wrongheaded - and then loking back - what over 3 years jamesbwatson,, when i have had a few blocks - and then deciding that constituted a pattern of endless, excessive personal attacks - when in 3 years i've had a block a year - normally, until this absurdity - for about 24 hours. Where did i say i had no intention of abiding by wps policy - i have no desire to be sweary - i think if swearing is outlawed totally wp poicies are out of kilter but i dont believe swearing is illegal on wp. anyway- i think this ban is outrageously excessive -and admins should confront POV twisters more - this picking on the odd use of the f word - too easySayerslle (talk) 10:49, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Misplaced Pages works because people work together. That's why the civility rules are very important- it is not possible for people to work together if they can't be polite to one another. This is your fourth block for making personal attacks, so a month seems very reasonable. Generous, even. It's likely that the next one will be six months, a year, or even indefinite. You seem to think that one block a year for personal attacks is reasonable- it's very unusual. Most people never get blocked, and to have a block log as long as yours but not be permanently blocked is unusual. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:12, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

i dont suppose you bothered to look at what led to my unforgivable use of the f word :

Christians were reportedly present in early demonstrations in Homs but stopped participating in them when Islamist Salafi slogans were proclaimed.

do you think you fairly represented the referenced material with this edit? I couldnt find in the BBC article the emphasis you put on the material here at all. is that because I'm missing something or is it your POV editing? the article says everyone walked off in solidarity with the Xtians and as far as I could see didnt say they stopped participating full stop at allSayerslle (talk) 21:32, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Why do you attribute those edits to me? FunkMonk (talk) 21:37, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

because in the edit history it isnt there after you edited on 2 march and then it is there after you edited on 4 march. still, a revealing answer in its way i guess. says it allSayerslle (talk) 22:19, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Read whatever you want into it, who cares, seems I must have mixed up different articles or something, it was months ago. FunkMonk (talk) 22:25, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

i read into it you are a liar and a twister for your POV - you got 'mixed up' - yeah right. fuck off. Sayerslle (talk) 09:22, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

-isnt that misrepresenting the source and then denying you wrote it ? is that all fine? - i dont accept no workplace operates properly without the occasional verbal fracas- i've known workplaces where the odd verbal fracas arose - seems par for the course to me - i don't like the implication that you'll enforce a surface perfectionism of conduct while POV twisting and 'subtle' verbal undermining, and mocking bullying such as BWilkins practices is winked at and encouraged - loathesome to me all that - - this last verbal storm in a teacup was all but blown out until the interference of BWilkins - who doesnt seem to actually edit articles much - anyway, teachers rarely get it right when dealing with bullies thats been my experience - c'est la vie. Sayerslle (talk) 16:17, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

I think you're confused: the block is not about swearing, it's for calling people "liar" and other such personal attacks, and similar actions throughout your "career" (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:06, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

what does "career" imply - is that a personal attack. or just snidy. like the editor implied he hadnt made the edits that twisted the source material. i guess thats the difference - i just say what i'm thinking, straight out, you leave snidy comments in " " , and you, like the other editor, imply things - mean really. snide.Sayerslle (talk) 11:13, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Reading this discussion, and some of your other comments to warnings, I am getting the impression that you don't think WP:CIVIL is a good rule, and that you are not willing to follow it. Is that correct? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:01, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

No. Sayerslle (talk) 21:35, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Right. No, you don't think that WP:CIVIL is a good policy, and no you don't intend to follow it.

If I read this talkpage correctly, you have copy/pasted another conversation in the middle of this unblock discussion ... why? It makes it look like others have been involved in this conversation. You also understand that someone else's comments may explain your own incivility, but they can never excuse it. In addition, your "example" is horrifically non-WP:AGF. You called someone to the carpet for an edit they made 3 months ago ... what use is that? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:55, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Horrifically? Do you watch the news? how can you call anything I write here horrific? perspective? -AS for the 'no' it was a reply to fisherqueens question 'you intend to ignore CIVIL?' kind of question - - do you believe in civility - was it civil to mock at my wp'career' - the edit made was still on the page , for all that it was made 3 months ago - and i dont find that so long ago anyhow , and it was not an accurate reflection of the source. and then i got told 'who cares?' - well, i do. i care that material is accurately reflected and not distorted. naive i guess. Sayerslle (talk) 22:10, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Wait... some of this discussion is copied from elsewhere? The people who appear to have commented on your block did not, in fact, comment on your block? I don't understand why you would do that. Could you remove the conversation that didn't happen here, and replace it with a link? It is not okay to misrepresent other users in that way- and it makes it confusing to understand what discussion of your block has really happened. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:27, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

No one has commented on the block except you because I asked for a review after wilkins/waston blocked me . thats it. noone else has commented on it. Sayerslle (talk) 22:52, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Here is the diff of this page where he copied/pasted from this discussion here ...or was it originally directly above the block notice? It's been copy/pasted all over, so it seems (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 00:15, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, I'm super confused about where that conversation actually happened. It's a pretty clear example of you assuming bad faith of another editor, and being insulting in a situation where being a little more reasonable would have worked better, so I have no idea why you'd want to cut and paste it anywhere - did you think it made you look like you were in the right? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:28, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

perhaps i just wanted to practise cutting and pasting. is that finished now. you think i'm lucky to be blocked for a month, - perhaps it should be indefinite. ok. finished? weird indeed. in a month maybe i can return and edit some articles - like therese of lisieux - god knows it would be nice to spend some mental time in the orbit of a spirit like that. cleansing. Sayerslle (talk) 00:43, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Notes for after this months block is ended

1: is there a place i can ask for admins actions and manners to be reviewed?

• is AGF not just a starting place - after other editiors have manifested, and exhibited obvious bad faith and incivility, does it still hold
• arent admins meant to be calm , and above it kind of thing - when wilkins mocks at my wp 'career' , talks of me 'horrifically' non AGF-ing - and when fisher queen mocks with ' do you think you are somehow shown in a good light' etc like you you scum kind of thing,, they are heightening the atmosphere, not being civil themselves. isnt there a rule like 'want to enforce civility rules - obey civility rules' - or has an editor who used the 'f' word become fair game, beyond the pale like the jews in the middle ages,and admins can go at it like poor old Angus getting basketed by the bullies in Summoned by Bells.
• shouldnt there be some kind of rule that to be an admin at least half your edits should be on articles - kind of power corrupts, -those who seek it are least likely the ones you'd want to have it - those that see being an admin as a big deal, who hardly edit articles should be ruled out because the main focus is the encyclopedia, not the policing - i reckon people who care about the content of an article tend to look after them anyhow.- like wilkins thinks its a big deal to be an admin, he thinks 99% of admin abuse is abuse of admins - he's pre-judged everything, got everything out of perspective, not only is being an admin not a big deal, the whole of wp is not a big deal in the scheme of things - its just an online version of those big heavy books on the bottom shelf of the bookcase isnt it? -
• and the utterly cavalier appoach to the bad faith, so that admins dont seem to care about NPOV, is that typical of all adnmins or just these two?
• and the wilkins 'law' of 'that might explain - doesnt excuse' - so what excuses your mockery of my 'career' then wilkins - my 'f' word might explain your mockery, but does it excuse it? - and fisherqueens disdain ' do you think that shows you ina good light? - again , it seems like the admins are heightening feelings - not above it all enough - admins should edit more articles and police a bit less - and finally, as for 'career' wilkins - thats probably a bit of veiled autobiography , my wp acivity is more an outcrop of ocd ish behaviour, and after a month I'll probbly have got different routines so that 'll be it - and no that isnt an invite to fisherqueen to block me for ever thuogh she seems eager to do so -bcause i might like to edit Orwell or THerese articles - Sayerslle (talk) 17:27, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Who mocked you? I always put "career" in quotes or italics because none of us get paid for this, so it's not really a career. I see you've been harping on that for some reason. Again, WP:AGF a little.

You're not blocked for saying "fuck"; you're blocked for personal attacks. Even above, you seem to continue to believe you're above civility and community as a whole. This is a community.

You are always welcome to see a breakdown of my contributions. I find this one to break things down best - of course, you don't get to see my contributions to articles that have since been deleted. At least one of the articles I have created was featured as a "did you know", so I do my own share of gnomish work around here, thanks.

I'm willing to believe that your actions are all because you've never read nor understood the 5 pillars of Misplaced Pages. It's good reading. Indeed, if you read those, and then read WP:GAB, you would probably be able to put together a pretty good unblock request that another admin may accept. Then you'll be able to file an WP:RFC/U about my editing, or an WP:RFC/ADMIN if you have some proof that I have actually abused my admin tools.

Finally, I will remind you: while blocked, the only use of your talkpage is supposed to be to attempt to become unblocked. Additional discussions, personal attacks against anyone, etc can lead to this talkpage being locked. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:47, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Sayerslle, sorry if it appears I'm butting in here but since I've never edited the article in question, but have been involved with pages associated with ideologically driven editors, that some observations may be in order. Having looked at the edit in question it is clearly wrong as you state but unless there has been a history of such editing by the same editor I would in this instance assume it wasn't deliberate and that it's simply a misreading/paraphrase of the two paragraphs in the original article. It may even be a case of the editor seeing what they assumed to be there at the unconscious level. I have made the same mistake. These articles, I guess, will generate a lot of heat. The only time I accused somebody of lying on wikipedia was because I knew of a whole string of questionable edits such that there was no reasonable grounds for assuming good faith and the editor in question didn't report me (a wise decision on their part from my point of view). Do you have a link to where the person complained to an admin about you calling he/she a liar and rejected the accusation? To block somebody for a month without first analysing the truth of a charge seems strange since it revolves around matters of fact. If you have a got it wrong then I'm sure when the temperature has dropped you would right any wrong committed in the heat of the moment and you don't need wiki legalese to do the human thing. Yt95 (talk) 15:24, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

hello yt95 - I dont think the editor complained to an admin and rejected the accusation. admins have decided that i need blocking for a month without him complaining i think - i dont even believe i can write here unless I'm seeking to be unblocked and i shan't bother any further with all that. its quite authoritarian - not much fun. i dont mind being reminded not to be potty mouthed - fair enough, i find the 'who says i wrote it' and 'who cares?' kind of uncivil, but people see things differently - one thing is with the month clear of any ocd-ish wp editing i shall really read paul johnsons 'history of Xty' which i started a while back and found his style fine , but then went off on other roads again. best wishes. Sayerslle (talk) 18:07, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Watson - i read on the link Wilkins indicated that to complain about admins actions i should address concerns first to the admin who blocked me . Can I ask 1: did you look at the edit that i questioned - the edit funkmonk made on the syrian crisis and sectarianism. if you did, did you see the point I was making? - that the edit mangled the sense and misrepresented the paul wood bbc article - with pov effects - intended or not. 2: when the editor responds ' who says i made the edit?' - do you as an admin think that is civil? - and is it good faith? , to my enquiry? why dissemble at this point? 3: when he acknowledges he did make the edit, he says 'who cares? - i got mixed up' - is that bad faith in your admins eyes? is that totally civil? since obviously the questioner cares or he wouldn't have asked would he? and that it was all of 3 months ago - do you see as an admin that is not so long ago and is hardly relevant since the eit was live , on the article page, misrepresenting the bbc article .shouldn't editors care if they misrepresent? , and thus catastrophically distort the meaning of the source? then , at this point, faced with this evasiveness, and then incivility to my enquiry - at this point i write 'liar - fuck off' . I am banned for a month - funkmonk is not even asked politiely to use more care in future and respond helpfully to enquiries. 4; when fisherqueen mocks me for wanting to point out the occasion for the 'liar' / personal abuse , she says - i was the one who all along did not assume good faith - but i asked a question - a valid question concerning an honest concern - only when i was treated with disdain and bamboozled with 'who says i wrote it?' kind of thing - who cares? ' etc did I then no longer really AGF and swore. those are my questions to you. Sayerslle (talk) 20:40, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

houla massacre tlk page - funkmonk has a POV to push all right. where is watson admin to look at my complaints. why doesnt fisherqueen ask funkmonk if he has any POV at all? why are the admins so useless and corrupt? Sayerslle (talk) 17:31, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

1. You have already been told, but I'll tell you again. You were not blocked for saying "fuck off", you were blocked for personal attacks.
2. You do not seem to grasp the point that personal attacks are not acceptable on Misplaced Pages, no matter how convinced you are that someone else's editing is at fault. Posting here at great length to explain why you think other people's editing is wrong is missing the point.
3. I do not see anything that looks to me like "mocking" you.
4. You have continued to make personal attacks on this page while blocked. If you really honestly can't see that that is what you have been doing then it is very likely that you will continue to make personal attacks, which will be likely to lead to an indefinite block. To avoid that, I strongly urge you to re-read everything you have written on this page, and try to see how it will look to others. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:13, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

is that answering my specific questions about whether you looked at the incident that sparked this block? if i'm blocked for 'personal attacks' and 'harassment' - when no editor compained i was 'personally attacking' or 'harassing' them - how it looks to me - like bullying really. like i've got the wrong side of wilkins/watson/fisherqueen - no-one has complained about me to you have they? and i just edit articles really mainly - occasional verbal exchanges on talk pages - i shout and am shouted at kind of thing - politics/history on talk pages - it is fairly common ( and yes, i do think i should stop swearing, even if very frustrated) - and for this i get a months ban from uninvolved admins who havent ben called to intervene - because why would i be complained about - i am not the caricature you admins are painting frankly - thats it - i'll shut up - you obviously aren't going to say whether you looked at the incident where i was concerned over an edit that misrepresented a bbc article. you know - bothering about the integrity of the prose - or 'missing the point' as you see it. i am blocked for harassment - though no-one said i was harassing them and 'personal abuse' though no-one complained to an admin i was personally abusing them - (though yes, i accept, i did abuse funkmonk and have abused a few others - and its been mutual dislike) i see this - you and wilkins and fisherqueen hate my guts, thats how it looks to me. Sayerslle (talk) 19:35, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Nobody needs to complain about being harassed - your actions led to the block, period. I have never hated any individual in my life. You are STILL not accepting responsibility for YOUR ACTIONS. How many times do we need to point out the specific policies that you broke before you actually get it. If the answer is "never" then we might as well lock this talkpage, and block you indefinitely. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 22:38, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I do accept responsibility for my edits. I personally, if an editor came to my talk page and said 'i saw this edit of yours Sayerslle and the ref you gave it for it, and i can't see how you got from one to the other. whats this about -what you've written seems to misrepresent whats written in the source material - what explains that sayerslle, your pov? what? ' - i would have looked at my edit and then replied. thats me accepting responsibility. when i asked a question similar i was told 'what makes you say i wrote it?' and then 'who cares?' and 'i got mixed up' - from a single source? - i would have just answered the questions straight off - but I accept i am obviously the one out of step - i shall certainly change my ways - if suffered to be allowed to return to volunteer to edit articles i shall never depart from article space -and never depart from the blandest civility if attacked myself on my talk page Sayerslle (talk) 12:01, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

If you came to me on my talkpage about an edit I did 3 months ago, I'd pretty much ignore it - I cannot remember the circumstances behind all 28000+ edits I have done. If you pushed me to try and remember, I'd probably treat you with some degree of contempt - just like they did. It's all well and good to discuss recent edits/changes, but there's a logical/common sense thing that comes into play as we forget the reasoning behind specific edits. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 08:25, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

youd 'probably treat me with some degree of contempt' - because i asked you about an edit that deformed the source material? - all of three months ago? hardly time for 28,000 edits - i dont forget the reasoning behind edits i made all of three months ago - but we are different. and it seems to me like what you're saying above is rather the opposite of taking responsibilty for your edits -and i dont think contempt is a CIVIL response either to a concern about the integrity of the prose, - which is the centre of the project after all isnt it?, the articles with the words the reader reads about the subject of the article. Sayerslle (talk) 14:05, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Does "some degree of contempt" equal uncivil? No. God almighty, will you just cut out the WP:BATTLE mentality - it doesn't belong in life, and it sure doesn't belong on Misplaced Pages. Look, don't even bother asking me what I had for breakfast last Monday - I won't remember. Nevertheless, it was your RESPONSE when the other editor said "I DON'T REMEMBER" - you called him a liar, and went off on him. That is not, nor shall it ever be. That's the entire point. If you cannot fathom that, then we might as well just lock this talkpage and move on - there're more intelligent things to be doing here than having a battle of wits with an unarmed individual (✉→BWilkins←✎) 14:52, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

to edit articles - thats all i want yes , move on. except i'm blocked. when i'm unblocked it will be articles 100% as far as i'm concerned. Sayerslle (talk) 15:07, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Right, so, an unblock request that is WP:GAB-compliant will help. In it, you'll need to acknowledge that what you said was uncivil, that you will ensure not to follow that path again, nor maintain any form of WP:BATTLE-attitude, and include a good idea of the types of edits/articles you intend to improve as you move forward. Eventually, if you're able to do as you're suggesting, this whole thing will blow over and be gone ... I personally will not action the unblock, so make it good and make it count. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 15:46, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

putting notes from paul O'Shea's book here - cant even edit my sandbox in this oubliette set up

notes from Paul O'Shea's book intro : " acceptance of Pius XII as the veritable savior of Europe's Jews is proof of fidelity to the Church, the pope, and the Tradition. Alterntively, suggestions that Pius made mistakes, or worse, is regarded as proof of dissent and even apostasy. the good guys are devout catholics who have studied Pius XII's life, the vatican and John paul II" and the bad guys are " the media, liberal catholics, academicians, and editorial commentators."

significantly, over the last ten years there have been a growing number of Jewish voices allied with the catholic Far right on the question of paceli's role during the Holocaust. they are often well-funded, media-savvy, and enjoy significant favour with a number of like-minded vatican officials. Their commitment is always to a willingness to substitute rigorous and open research with the inflexible certainty of ideological devotion. It may appear somewhat simplistic, but the only way forward is through the speedy opening of the Vatican archives of the 1939-45 war. If Rome wishes to engage seriously with historians on the role of the wartime pope, dalliances with the polemicists and apologists must be replaced by engagement with credible and qualified historians. - what has become more of a war of attrition than historical inquiry."

"The justifiable and verifiable, criticsm that can be made is that pius XII did not give as full a leadership as was possible through public proclamation of the type employed by other leaders from both sides of the war. he never once spoke of Jews as a distinct victim group. " - " he acted in response to situations, rarely taking the initiative, and always with an eye to the context of what he perceived as the larger struggle between Christianity and atheistic Bolshevism." - aktion, grande razzia Rome , October 1943 " many - were astounded that he refused to be used as a political pawn by either side - at the end of the war, pius declared to the world that he had done all he could to the best of his ability."- "Pius named almost every victim group except one - Jews . communists were named more often - the fear that refused to vanish - the Popes dread of a communist sweep across what he still regarded as Christian Europe. -

Questions - How did pacelli respond to the rise in antisemitism in Europe throughout the interwar years.."

for the intro , maybe , if expanded In 1963 Rolf Hochhuth's play The Deputy had opened in Germany and in effect accused the pope of negligence and moral culpability before the Nazi destruction of European Jewry. Hochhuth's work in turn had led supporters of the dead pope to write about Pacelli's strengths and virtues - amid rumours of a Soviet-inspired black propaganda conspiracy created to depict Pius as pro-German and pro-Nazi. Disturbed by increasing negative evaluations of the Church's role during the war, Paul VI ordered a team of Vatican-approved scholars - Pierre Blet, Robert Graham, Angelo Martini, Burkhart Schneider - to collect and edit all relevant documents pertaining to the Secretariat of State of the Holy see during the Second World War. 12 volumes of Actes et Documents du Saint-Siege relatifs a la Seconde Guerre Mondiale were published between 1965 and 1981,- " as a direct result of Hochhuth's paly and the growth of academic and religious unrest over the role of Pius XII during the Holocaust."

A recent study of the issue by historian Paul O'Shea concluded that "deliberate ignorance of the complex network of multiple contexts -military objectives,Vatican power politics of whatever hue, the legacy of centuries of anti-Judaism and Christian antisemitism, the battle against modernity, and the all-too comfortable alliances with shades of fascism - leave Pius XII's defenders without credibility". The Vatican had decided as early as 1924 that Soviet Russia posed the greatest threat to Christianity and that all other regimes were open to at least some form of negotiation with Rome. "Pacelli's decisions - to keep the Catholic Church as intact as possible within Germany and Occupied Europe until liberation by an allied coalition would come a a price - Rome would not do or say anything that would create a crisis of conscience for German Catholics, many of whom were active in their support of the Reich and the war, and , at least, passive toward the elimination of the Jews."

Nothing has demonstrated the inadequacy of the international community's response to the crisis in Syria quite so starkly as the growing number of massacres in the country's Sunni Arab villages.

The first reports of what appears to be the bloodiest yet filtered through as the UN Security Council met in closed session to make yet another attempt to step up the pressure on Bashar al-Assad, Syria's president.

As many as 200 people were killed in the village of Treimsa, according to opposition figures, eclipsing the bloodletting in nearby Qubeir, where between 55 and 78 died on June 6th, and May's Houla massacre that claimed 108 lives. from telegraph article - see guardian also UN obstructed from entering Tremseh..etc - that article - wp article its not a massacre - usual edits trajectory

Conserning Syria timeline article

Hi! You were right, it was in the report that was watchable in the blog, so it truely is sourced. My apologies. That Alex Thomson surely is weird man, rebels tried to get him killed, but he still sympathises with them. It ain't Stockholm syndrome, but it is something quite likely. But anyway, you were right and I was wrong. Will try better the next time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kepukka (talk • contribs) 10:12, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

'something quite likely stockholm syndrome' ? - psychiatry to explain away the unwelcome report, off to a psychiatric hospital for him, he is weird - or maybe he has no predetermined script and is not just about propaganda maybe. if he thinks the rebels try to get him killed, he says so - if the graffiti is painted over he says so , a camera records the physical scene- maybe he's just a reporter trying to do his level best and as fairly as possible - hard to believe i'm sure. Sayerslle (talk) 12:03, 24 July 2012 (UTC) today 26 july btw thomsons blog is very unflattering of saudi/qatari influence - neither regime as he points out , has a good democratic record - the sectarian nature of its seeking influence and the anti-democratic role saudis played in bahrain. etc . he is like a journalist, not a partisan for the syrian rebels - says he has tried to get to talk tto the ASsad people but they are stasi-like secretive - hurting their case kind of thing - Sayerslle (talk) 19:33, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Russian support

Stop adding Russian support. They have normal bilateral relations, they have a contract about sale of arms, which means, Russians give arms to Assad and he pays, while US, Qatar, Britain ect are giving aid and rebels don't need to give them anything in return. You see, Assad is still president of UN-member country called Syria, and it's normal that two countries keep the good relations. So, any country, according to your logic, that has a trade contract with Syria is supporting them in the conflict? --Wustenfuchs 01:23, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

These aren't normal times. you know russia supports Assad dont you ? its like chechnya to putin. if military economic diplomatic support is going in, its going in.. its late - im not a sophist, reality is the master. the reality is Russia is supporting ASsad al kinds of ways - you know it, i know it, everyone knows it - but keep condescending to me telling me i dont understand, i don't care. reality is the master. Russia/Putin , the flag should be there . Sayerslle (talk) 01:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Sellers edit summary

There is no need for your sarcasm in your edit summary. It was NOT clearly sourced previous, which is why I deleted it. Furthermore your current rather scant citation (apart from being in an inconsistent style to the remainder of the article) leads to a page which makes no reference to Peter Hall whatsoever, nor does it support your edit. I will flag this up to the FAC citation reviewer and ask for their comments. - SchroCat (^ • @)

the peter hall quote derives from the programme - the bbc page was just to prove the existence of the programme mentioned - as for 'inconsistent style' well i'm sorry - so good content will be axed for inferior cliched tabloid rubbish because it doesnt fit some need for a false idea of what excellence is etc. i dont mean to be sarcastic - i genuinely can't stand the daily mail style of speaking bout things its all opinions of what makes a good read. if you axe the excellent peter hall/arena material i won't seek to return it to the article and will just not read the tabloid-eze personally. wikiwatcher hated the peter hall quote in the lead too - so you agree about that at least. Sayerslle (talk) 08:02, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

The problem I have is that it is fairly unverifiable. If there was a link to the programme's text, then that would be great, but there isn't. I've asked the FAC citation reviewer to comment. It's also poorly written—"he lacked the talent to deal with his talent"—the double use of 'talent' jarrs, as does the additional space before the citation. As we're at FAC with the article they are a little hot on things being written properly, cited properly and sourced properly. - SchroCat (^ • @) 08:09, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

i'm precis-ing the peter Hall quote which was 'its not enough in this business to have talent - you have to have talent to handle the talent - and that i think peter didn't have'- i don't personally find it jarring - i like the repetition in fact-in the original - my condensing is less well phrased of course - as for unverifiable - i dont know what to do about that - i'll have a look on you tube - i doubt the programmes text is anywhere handy. this link proves peter hall contributed to the programmeSayerslle (talk) 08:27, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

'spurious' peter hall quote?? bloody cheek. btw this sentence "An enigmatic figure, he often claimed to have no identity outside the roles that he played." is narration fragment from the Arena documentary. Sayerslle (talk) 16:27, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. When you recently edited Animal Farm, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Theatre (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 04:40, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Therese of Lisieux

Much better. The phrase "God allowed her to find suffering through the remembrance of this favor" just looked so strange, but I didn't get the full significance of her feelings in my edit. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:52, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. that was a strange 'pious language'-y phrase you drew attention to. I think its probably lazy and not best practice to just keep quoting Therese herself, but I tried paraphrasing the sense and couldn't get it right , - so I just quoted her.Sayerslle (talk) 22:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Sometimes I think the safest thing to do when trying to explain how a person felt is to use their own words.Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:33, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Arthur Marshall (broadcaster), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Newbury (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:33, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Life at the Top (film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Room at the Top (film)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Canada in the infobox

Why did you remove it? It was well sourced and clear. Alabamaboy1992 (talk) 13:18, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring

There is a discussion here that involves you. --Wüstenfuchs 20:28, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

September 2012

Template:Z10

Adiminstrators' Noticeboard/Incidents

There is a discussion here that involves you. --Wüstenfuchs 19:32, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Your thoughts are requested

I’ve started a move request to change the title of the article Al-Nusra Front to Protect the Levant to Al-Nusra, per WP:commonname. Your input is appreciated. -- FutureTrillionaire (talk) 14:06, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Gielgud, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Little Theatre (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Dostoyevsky tag

Regarding this edit summary, did you make a WP:GOCE request for the article? If not, it appears the tag was removed without credible grounds. Thanks. ~ Alcmaeonid (talk) 15:13, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Alcmaeonid - no, I made no GOCE request for the article - re-reading that section it still seems unsatisfactory to me , though the bit about the French and democracy seems more lucidly put - it's surprising to me there's no mention of Demons in that section - Malcolm Muggeridge said that novel was a great political work, a great political prophesy, and that Dostoevsky sensed what was coming in the 20th century - I wish I knew more about Dostoevskys politics - I think that section is a bit clearer but also that it could still be tagged for clarity issues - P.S. - i havent forgotten about Nietzsche and Human, all too human, - I lost my momentum in the proof reading I was doing, but I'll finish it. ! Sayerslle (talk) 18:27, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Gielgud, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Constant Nymph (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:33, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

John Gielgud - Aniela Aszpergerowa

According to Aniela Aszpergerowa and pl:Aniela Aszpergerowa she was Polish, not Lithuanian, so I have corrected John Gielgud. She was born Kamińska, which is Polish. Xx236 (talk) 09:23, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

I took the detail from page 2 of Ronald Haymans biography of Gielgud - page two it states "His grandmother, Aniela Aszpergerowa, had been a well known Lithuanian actress, and on the banks of the river Memel, in Lithuania, there was a castle, Zamek Gielguda, which belonged to the Counts Gielgud until the revolution of 1831. The eldest Count Gielgud, a Polish general, died n the revolution and his younger brother was banished." I think you should supply a reference ideally at some point for describing her as Polish - Lithuanian has a source. Sayerslle (talk) 13:12, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Aszpergerowa was Kamińska and was Polish and Gielguds were Gielguds, with Lithuanian roots. Aszpergerowa worked in Wilno, which didn't make her Lithuanian, ahe worked longer in Lwow, which didn't make her Ukrainian, either. Generally Western ideas about Eastern European geography and ethnicities are comparable to Ancient Greece descriptions of people with dog's heads. Ronald Hayman is probably en expert in Western subjects but unfortunately writes about East. "Lithuanian actress", really.Xx236 (talk) 07:39, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

This article (in Polish) informs about the common error in British press. No Lithuanian roots of Aszpergerowa are known.Xx236 (talk) 08:02, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

ok. maybe she got ascribed the Lithuanian roots of her husband somewhere down the line. the polish roots are sourced now so thats good . Sayerslle (talk) 20:06, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Salome (play), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Against Nature (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Admin noticeboard for editing on the Houla massacre

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Hi Sayerslle, I've started a discussion at the Administrator noticeboard regarding your editing of wikipedia's page describing the Houla massacre. While I appreciate that you care about the massacre and contribute material, your commentary is poorly written, often partisan, and sometimes devolves into superficial satire or ad-hominem attack. That kind of editing does not help others understand or appreciate your point of view, and is counterproductive to the creation of an exemplary, or at least neutral wikipedia article. Please feel free to comment at the noticeboard. I won't be able to contribute until this evening. Regards, -Darouet (talk) 21:17, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

HI Darouet - i added something to the article page a while ago , details from alex thomsons report on channel 4 news , a day or two after the massacre - he actually visited the scene -unlike the German journalist. i dont remember you contributing anything at the time and i'm sorry you slag off my contributions to the encyclopedia. i'll leave the article in question - it was ok imo before you sought to improve it , - you want undue weight for a certain damascus german journaists report, - thats it. the prevaling view is that the narrative of the villagers themselves as delivered to alex thomson a day or two after is the most plausible - and the damascus based german journalist story is tangential. undue weight kind of thing Sayerslle (talk) 23:03, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

What is poorly written by the way? I've hardly added anything to the article - or the talk page, and i like Philip Larkin and Henry Miller and Charles Baudelaire for Christs sake, - I don't want to come across as illiterate - what is so poorly written? on the article itself i dont think i've written more than two sentences in three months anyhow - Sayerslle (talk) 23:14, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

copying this from your attack on me - "Sayerslle has been arguing that an account of the massacre based upon a report by the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung should not receive mention in wikipedia's article. " Where? where did i ever argue such a thing? i said it should say the material came from a reporter in Damascus, quoting anonymous sources-I never said the report from hermann shouldn't be mentioned. that is not right. And you attack for me for saying i'd never heard of the paper - so i dont know the name of every paper in the world? do you - i dont know every german paper - why would i - i went on to add it looked like RS - a right wing german rag but RS - please don't tell lies like i said all mention should be discarded - I never said such a thing. Sayerslle (talk) 00:17, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Sayerslle, I don't think that my statement, that you would like no reference to the FAZ account, is inaccurate or an attack. If you do believe FAZ shouldn't be mentioned, or if you don't, that's OK. I made a note on the notice board because these kinds of edits are disruptive: (), (), (). All I'm asking is that you take more time to consider your edits carefully - in terms of both content and grammar - and that you show respect to other editors by engaging meaningfully with the talk pages while avoiding ad hominem attacks. I know you've contributed to the Houla massacre article and respect that. I also agree with you when you write that "the prevaling view is that the narrative of the villagers themselves as delivered to alex thomson a day or two after is the most plausible." What I can't agree to however is that Hermann's account is "tangential," or that the FAZ is a "right wing german rag."

I'm glad that you like Henry Miller and Baudelaire (a French poet, as I'm sure you know). If you'd like to improve your writing, you should 1) practice capitalization where appropriate 2) pay more attention to punctuation and 3) read your words as if you hadn't written them. For instance, the sentence "undue weight kind of thing" is not really a sentence, but were you to develop it, you might better explain how it is that you feel different journalistic accounts should be weighted in the encyclopedia entry. I don't think you should leave the page, you should just edit more conscientiously. -Darouet (talk) 17:01, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

It doesnt matter that you personally esteem and treat seriously Hermann's account - it's whether it has been picked up and discussed by other RS. thats my understanding of how things are approached. as for the advice i don't know your credentials for handing it out - it looks petty minded and feeble to me, -what is the point of telling me baudelaire was a french poet when I've written that I admire him? - and the examples of my poor writing style are thoroughly trivial - give advice to people who respect your opinion . Sayerslle (talk) 17:16, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung actually carried two articles on this issue, which was "picked up and discussed" by the Berliner Morgenpost, Der Speigel, the BBC, the National Review, Foreign Policy, The Telegraph of India, the New Statesman, The Guardian, The Scotsman, Russia Today, and plenty of smaller outlets used by professional news sources like LexisNexis including The Moderate Voice, the Activist Post, the Pacific Free Press, the World Socialist Web Site and Morning Post, and so forth (that list would drag on a while). The FAZ account is also specifically mentioned by the United Nations HRC report from August 2012 because its authors obviously decided they had to take it seriously, investigate, and respond. So you see, when you fail to even consider the criteria you claim to hold important, and insist on writing about "reliable sources" while admitting you've never heard of major global papers, why I might comment on the nature of your writing and propose that you spend no more time thinking about the content of your thoughts than your presentation of them.

I mentioned that Baudelaire was French (and stated that you probably knew as much) only because we were discussing the English language, which Baudelaire did not make use of. -Darouet (talk) 19:03, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

If you search for reports mentioning 'Houla' in 'The Guardian' - what picture emerges? This is typical - "The biggest single massacre confirmed so far was in Houla province in May, in which 108 people were killed, including 49 children and 34 women.

Survivors told the Guardian that the killings in that case had been carried out by the Shabiha militia. A UN investigation also pointed to evidence of Shabiha involvement." From summer 2012. I found one passing reference to the FAZ german damascus journalist narrative , in a story about spiegel contradicting it , having actually gone to Houla to speak to people there - its a question of weight etc. I 100% deny i ever wrote that the FAZ article should be not mentioned at all -you may not think that your saying so is inaccurate but I'm telling you it is - In the meantime like I said i'm leaving the article and i've said all I feel I want to say about this. Sayerslle (talk) 19:53, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Leftist

How can you consider yourself a leftist when you do nothing but apologise for the most reactionary and pro-American forces in the Middle East all day long? FunkMonk (talk) 06:18, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

The Amal militia, Hezbollah, Bashar al Assad and his wife shopping like marie Antoinette while opponnts are tortured, KGB Putin, Russian Orthodox/Putin social reactionaries, Iranian hierocrats - corrupt Gaddafi, thats not my idea of 'progressive' people and ideas . Sayerslle (talk) 14:29, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

just thinking about the channe 4 series the british empire I watched a long time ago - the fall of Mohammad Mosaddegh for example - the West has a lot to answer for, for sure, - he would be more my idea of a leftist leader, not the current lot. Sayerslle (talk) 14:54, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Mid Eastern leftists are usually allied with those groups because they at least have the same enemies, and have some Socialist leanings. But the pro-Saudi/American Hariri family and the Phalangists? No Leftist supporters at all (apart form you, apparently). So it would make more sense to be against that faction, or better yet, not support any of them. Like it or not, as a Leftist, you have more politically in common with the Ba'ath party than with the Muslim Brotherhood. FunkMonk (talk) 14:35, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

No. - this is a bit of text copy-pasted from the guardian, 27 july 2012 - "However, that has now changed, and not in President Bashar al-Assad's favour. Attacks on Palestinian camps by Syrian forces loyal to him – most recently last week against the Yarmouk camp – have resulted in killings, injuries, and the displacement of thousands. This has angered Palestinian refugees, many of whom are now openly supporting the revolution, as well as taking in Syrian refugees." and. Looking backwards at the mid 1980s -'early in 1985, the Amal militia-with the approval of the Syrians-attacked the camps of Sabra and Chatila and Bourj-al-Barajneh in southern Beirut'.

Sayerslle (talk) 22:32, 17 November 2012 (UTC)notes to self - books to read to add to my understanding - Disappearing Palestine, Jonthan Cook ISBN 1848130317 ; Ilan Pappe - Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine - ISBN 1851685553

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating The Temperate House, Sayerslle!

Misplaced Pages editor Razr Nation just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

The page needs some wikifying. Everything else seems to be in order.

To reply, leave a comment on Razr Nation's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

1RR violation at Operation Pillar of Cloud

Hello,

Please note that you violated the 1RR restriction at Operation Pillar of Cloud with your reinsertion of the Independent source. I would advise that you self-revert lest somebody bring it up at one of the noticeboards. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 16:46, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Its actually up to 2RR already, so this is getting serious.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 16:47, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

my sourced edit was reversed with the reason of 'grammar' which i regarded as specious - what was wrong with the grammar - then by someone saying that the reports in the guardian and independent cant be right because they know better - which is OR - which is serious . Sayerslle (talk) 16:57, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

See Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Sayerslle reported by User:Brewcrewer (Result: ). --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 17:12, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, satisfy any standard of behavior, or follow any normal editorial process. If you continue to misconduct yourself on pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the "Final decision" section of the decision page.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system.

You have reverted other editors several times. Please self-revert your recent edit at Operation Pillar of Cloud. Ankh.Morpork 17:13, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

1. ^ "Syria's slide towards civil war". BBC. 12 February 2012. Retrieved 4 March 2012.
2. Paul O'Shea, A Cross Too Heavy Chapter One, p.26 ISBN 978-0-230-11080-9