Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 129.10.244.102 (talk) at 20:48, 18 July 2009 (→Article). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

It is currently 20:41 where I am

Please place any questions or comments for me at the bottom of this page. Thanks.

Archives

1 - Mostly Exra Wax, Stevertigo, and questions about Jewish articles and anti-semitism 2 - Mostly DNA and genes, WHEELER and fascism 3 - some discussion of capitalism; debates on whether Jesus existed, and the cultural and historical background for Jesus 4 - Jesus, Jesus, Jesus 5 - Cheese Dreams and Jesus; race and evolution, capitalism, circumcision 6 - BCE/CE versus BC/AD 7 - BCE/CE versus BC/AD; FT2 and Cultural and Historical Background of Jesus 8 - Jesus, Bible, anti-Semitism, Martin Luthor, and the tip of the Virago iceberg 9 10 11 12 13 - The Bible, Evolution, Filllllll, Jesus, Race, advice for new admins 14 - a lot of race and intelligence stuff 15 - Fascism, Pharisees, and Race 16 - race, ethnicity and NOR 17 September 2007 18 October & November 2007 19 December 2007 20 January-February 2008 (Figs, psychohistory, ethnicity) 21 March-April 2008, Collenthegret and Epf 22 March- May 2008, R&I, Jagz, Jews and Christians 23 24 25 26 27

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Fascism in the political spectrum

The RfC on Fascism#Fascism in the political spectrum has now run one month and there are now two versions of the intro para:

Most scholars do not find the terms right and left very useful with regard to fascism, which incorporated elements of both left and right, rejected the main currents of leftist and rightist politics, and attracted adherents from both ends of the political spectrum. Hence, fascism can be called sui generis. Some scholars do place fascism squarely on the right or left.

Most academics describe fascism as extreme right, radical right, far right or ultra right; some calling it a mixture of authoritarian conservatism and right-wing nationalism. However, there exists a dissenting view that fascism represents radical centrism. Moreover, a number of writers highlight aspects of some types of fascist ideology which may typically be associated with the left.

Could you please comment at Talk:Fascism#RfC.

Following this RfC, there is currently a proposal regarding the issue of whether or not it is appropriate to characterise fascism as "right-wing".

Even if you don't have much to say, it would be useful if you could let your view be known in order to help guide the discussion towards some sort of conclusion.

Please take a look: here.

Thank you. --FormerIP (talk) 23:05, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Egypt

Please, have a look to Ancient Egyptian race controversy. The article has been radically changed by User:Dbachmann and friends. This unilateral act is fuelling a controversy.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka (talk) 12:16, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Christian Zionism in the United Kingdom

This has just been heavily edited. Looking even at the earlier version, what is this with 'References' which have footnotes? References which lead to a sales shop? Most of these 'References' are just external links and should be amalgamated and culled. Dougweller (talk) 07:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

White people

Hello! You might be inrerested in tha fact that some users are trying to re-add pictures to White people. Thsnks! The Ogre (talk) 16:10, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Faith and Fratricide

I found this book on ABE:--Woogie10w (talk) 23:30, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Faith and Fratricide: The Theological Roots of Anti-Semitism Rosemary Radford Ruether Average Customer Review: (1 reviews) Latest Reviews

	Bookseller: 
	Pro Quo Books 
	(Baltimore, MD, U.S.A.) 
	Bookseller Rating:  
	Book Price: 
	US$ 9.75 
	Quantity: 1 
	Shipping: 

you interest in editing 'culture'

Dear Slrubenstein,

The ‘culture’ page is a good page, and what we are now referring is a connotation of ‘customs’ consisting of ‘folk culture’ rather than of the semantics of ‘culture’. Let me exemplify this with simple semantic binaries if you are very much interested in this topic—the Bavarians or Scottish customs for example has its distinguishing pattern of depiction, which is a distinguishable ‘folk culture’. At the same time, the both folk cultures may share a subset of culture or component, namely, the custom of Christianity. Again, the ‘custom’ is not the culture but rather a component of culture. So what we usually think about culture is—the folk culture. Therefore, the beginning of this page now is about “folk culture’ than about the connotation of ‘culture’.

So the page should be rewritten by those who are interested in editing. Is this makes sense to you?

Regards. Susan White (talk) 02:50, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

It sounds like you want to edit an article on Folk culture which of course should be based on a review of verifiable and reliable sources. Beyond that, topics like Scottish custons I think do not deserve their own articles, I think the section on Scotland (for example) should have a section on folk culture and popular culture. Slrubenstein | Talk 18:12, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

wikibreak

Hi SLR, I hope you're keeping well. I'm going on an extended wikibreak from around now till mid-to-late October. I might pop in and out every know and then but I'll basically be unavailable till Halloween. I know you asked me ages ago to look at Culture in terms of cultural studies. Well I got this far.
From an outside perspective on the article there is too little weight given to the Cultural studies & sociological viewpoints in the lead section. I've read your talk posts and I agree with you about the page being a work in progress, but I would recommend that the lead be re-imagined. If there are 3 or 4 strands to the current definition of culture - give each one a paragraph with a brief explanation/definition. Head them with a lede line that summarizes them and the rest of the article. Anyway, I hope that the definition I've provided in my user-space is helpful. Good luck with it and everything else and hopefully I'll talk to you again in the winter--Cailil 17:51, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Cultural studies

Ok, I just want to get some clarification for what you are expecting (I am unfamiliar with what the community has envisioned). My knowledge of Cultural studies is limited, however I do know Western Marxism which is the Marxist classification which cultural studies falls into. The main identifying characteristic of Western Marxism is that they investigate culture in order to discover why the revolution never happened (Marx wrote from the perspective that the proletariat revolution was eminent, probably in his lifetime). One possible change I could make include giving a cited section referencing the above mentioned chain of events (in more detail of course), inserting a section on Adorno, Horkheimer, Marcuse, and Habermas and paralleling it to cultural studies. This would give the article a good look at how different theorists study different aspects of society (Adorno=art, Marcuse=advertising/comodification, Habermas=communicative rationality and the lifeworld/culture). If you are looking for something different, let me know. I will be humble enough to let you know if it is in my capability.Coffeepusher (talk) 00:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello!

Thank you for your continuing contributions! After avoiding this website for over a year, I was scared to take a look at the articles relating to broad concepts in the social sciences. You seem to be indispensable in keeping a number of key articles up to reasonable standard. I hope to start working with you again some time soon! 172 | Talk 01:40, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I just made a major reversion on state. At your convenience, please take a look and offer your feedback. Thanks in advance! 172 | Talk 02:02, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your comments. You bring up excellent points about the need to distinguish decentralized tributary states/centralized tributary states, and avoid Eurocentrism. I look forward to addressing those issues shortly once the current mess is resolved ... I may come to you a little latter for some help on the recent anthropological work. As you know, I am definitely going to be writing as a non-specialist in that area. 172 | Talk 02:43, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Culture Article

Wow! The article on culture is a real monster! I'll see what I can do... afamiglietti (talk) 02:31, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

State

I really need some help... I am no longer too skilled with the inner politics of Misplaced Pages. I now find my self overwhelmed trying to turn the article on state into an encyclopedic entry. The editors on that page are clueless yet very opinionated. Yet, I get the impression not one of them has sat in on a single political science course. 172 | Talk 00:55, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Culture and Language

I would love to help writing about the connection between langauge and culture. I don't have much time this week, but next week I'll start looking at it. ·Maunus·ƛ· 01:22, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I have been reading up on the topic but feel that it is a little difficult to fill out the section. I don't understand exactly what the contents of the section should be. Could you help me by giving an idea of what questions you'd want the section to answer?·Maunus·ƛ· 23:11, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I have added a first draft of a "language and culture" section at Talk:Culture#Draft·Maunus·ƛ· 15:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Few notes for those who edit 'culture'

I think many of you would agree with me if I said that the definition of ‘culture’ has not been still clarified from its componential variations. In order to narrow this, I think, one needs to begin with a right question that can bring some clarities; like, what does constitute in societies dominantly in their day-to-day live?

This assumes that given societies have given cultures. This is not true. It certainly ignores a hundred years of anthropological research. Slrubenstein | Talk 09:46, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

If one looks in to an anthropological evidence for its definition, then it can only be described in terms of hunter-gathering, fishing, agriculture, industrial innovation, etc.

Therefore in these days, the work culture is no longer a definition of ‘culture’ and fishing and farming require much higher education than some other fields. So rather as an approach to understanding, there are always some problems to bring the concept of ‘culture’ from a point of view. Susan White (talk) 16:37, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

"the work culture is no longer a definition of ‘culture’" is ungrammatical and I do not know what you mean - you may be better off contributing to the Misplaced Pages that is in your own language. "If one loooks in to an anthropological ..." again I do not know what you mean. What about Ira Bastow's article on culture in American Ethnologist? Slrubenstein | Talk 17:49, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Except pre-schoolings and retirements, today, in most societies, the ‘work culture’ consists of an average 10/24 hours. The work culture includes schooling for current and future jobs. So as to its universality (except in few societies), we do not translate the ‘work culture’ as a paradigm of culture, and we look at something that depicts and dominant in their daily activities of societies other than of their work culture. And in most societies, the next activity of sleeping consists 8/24 hours. It is also a universal pattern. However, one may disagree with me about this as to its meaning if a matter comes for example like sexuality in their sleeping hours.

"we do not translate the ‘work culture’ as a paradigm of culture" - don't know what this means. Don't really understand the rest of this paragraph. Slrubenstein | Talk 09:46, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I think she may be proposing that culture is what we do when we don't work. ·Maunus·ƛ· 12:48, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, this is a view of culture that would be rejected by every anthropologist I know of. In fact, there is a section of the AAA devoted to the study of "work" as a central part of culture. Slrubenstein | Talk 13:25, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it certainly doesn't work well with a modern understanding of culture. It seems rooted in an older idea of culture as the sum of traits that unite a supposedly homogeneous community. ·Maunus·ƛ· 18:02, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

So the rest of the 6/24 hours of a day is for our definition of culture that we look in to something in societies that is cultural specific and more of palpable in its depiction. That is:

Dress patterns

Meal patterns

Living patterns

Rituals

Cultural scripts

Art and music

Language (dialects)

Other minor variations

According to whom? Is this a significant view? Do you have a reliable source? Slrubenstein | Talk 09:46, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

However, some may argue the ‘work culture’ not as a universal concept in all societies in terms of their history and of their evolution in their cultural specific thoughts. In this way however, I think the definition seems more of its fixed stage.

Regards. Susan White (talk) 00:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

"the definition seems more of its fixed stage." I do not understand this. It is not grammatical. If English is a second language may I suggest you should be working on the Misplaced Pages for your native language? Slrubenstein | Talk 10:20, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean by “It is not grammatical”? Is that about the right complements that the word 'seems' can take or about the verb phrase that contains comparative adjective without its attributive phrase?

Susan White (talk) 18:14, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Dude, just diagram the sentence. It is garbled English. I am not here to tutor you in English. Like i said, why not work on th Misplaced Pages that is in your own language? Slrubenstein | Talk 23:39, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Marxist and culture

Thank you again for asking me to help out. while the work is going slow (I have several non-wikipedia projects on my plate right now) you can see the progress at User:Coffeepusher/Sandbox. Right now the plan is to show the split in Marxist thought between historical determinism, and cultural investigations. after that a section on the Frankfurt school and several kea theorists will be explored. all of this ties to cultural studies because while CS reinterpreted society through Gramsci, FS drew heavily on Lukacs and came up with an entirely different investigation.Coffeepusher (talk) 18:32, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Request for clarification

Slrubenstein, six of us have been banned unfairly from editing Ancient Egyptian race controversy. See Log of blocks and bans. We need your help. Please go to Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka (talk) 14:40, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Ancient Egyptian race controversy

I found a comprehensive scholarly reference from 2000 on current trends in arch and anth in Africa which I mentioned here on WP:FTN. Almost all aspects are discussed, including afrocentrism and regional studies in sub-Saharan Africa. Mathsci (talk) 08:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

(copied from my talk page) The introductory chapter by the editors contains a long survey on Egyptology, Arch and Anth on Africa and in Africa, etc. There is also an article on Black Athena by North which directly criticizes the rejection of usual academic methods on the issues of race. The collection of articles and indeed the 2000 conference itself was aimed at providing a resource for current trends in African Arch and Anth, with particular emphasis on Egyptology. I agree that before writing an article like this, the first step to be taken is to amass as much relevant secondary mainstream literature as possible. This has not happened so far. As in anthropology, there are very few egyptologists who have any desire to contribute to wikipedia (I've spoken to 2 so far). However, there are texts - like the 2000 UCL conference proceedings - which give balanced accounts by leading academics. I agree with almost everything you have written and don't quite know why this particular article with this particular title should exist at all. Mathsci (talk) 11:59, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Waiting for a response to my question on my talk page. I don't see why you disagree with what you call, quite unfairly I think, a tendentious edit by Dab. He said "have one article on the controversy, but mak it explicitly an article about scholars, journalists, activists, living in the twentieth century and using an argument over the past to forward present-day agendas," and you said "have one article on the controversy, but mak it explicitly an article about scholars, journalists, activists, living in the twentieth century and using an argument over the past to forward present-day agendas,". The article is about the history and development of the controversy, it is not about the race/color of the AE. Dougweller (talk) 12:54, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Slrubenstein. I do not have access to the checkuser reports, so I can't tell for sure myself. My current understanding is that Muntuwandi is Wapondaponda, and apparently s/he has used a number of socks as well, on this and other articles. I don't know the specific details. I am not sure if there are other editors in the sock-light as well, or if its just this one editor. The admins seem to take the attitude that the socks all belong to Muntuwandi, but really I can't say for sure.

I will consider your proposal on the talk page - its a bit complicated - and respond ASAP.

Regards Wdford (talk) 17:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Slrubenstein, thanks for your insights! I was still thinking about your proposal on setting two articles. Actually I found that an article figuring only theories by Egyptologies will have a difficult time here in Misplaced Pages. Because it will raise another question which will make an article in the article: who is an Egyptologist? Anybody who writes on ancient Egypt? or someone belonging to a body of specialists? How to determine who is a specialist and who is not? A very tricky matter! The ban or the block found me thinking what to do. Else, it is not the ban which makes me upset, but the way we have been banned. It looks targeted towards people having a certain opinion. The ban of Panehesy and the liberty dab is injoying confirms my view of selected bans.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka (talk) 17:17, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Help, I'm currently banned from this talk-page. Please remind me what Zara was proposing? Thanks Wdford (talk) 17:44, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. Obviously there would be a risk of NOR, but that same risk exists on many other articles too. I don’t see why the material cannot be reported by means of quoting recognised scholars in the various fields, and I don’t see why the material cannot be reported neutrally. Some people might err on either side, but the community will put them straight, until we have a correct tone and balance. It is not necessary to block an article or ban a range of editors to achieve NPOV, all that is needed is to add to anything that is not properly referenced and away we go. Why the big deal over this particular article? Wdford (talk) 21:11, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

This article has long since been poisoned, and there are too many ego's involved now that can't allow it to progress properly. Fresh approach - let's request that the article be officially renamed as "History of the Ancient Egyptian race controversy", and then edit it further as such. Once that is done we can create a separate article/s to deal with other aspects that are ommited here, or build that content into other existing articles if more appropriate. What do you think? Wdford (talk) 19:05, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

The ban on egypt/africa editors

You cannot see this ban in the block log because it is a topic ban. That is an administrator has simply declared that the editors cannot edit certain articles on pain of being blocked if they do it. They are however free to edit other articles.·Maunus·ƛ· 17:56, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think you have any options for personal action. The articles on afrocentrism are subject to probation imposed by ArbCom - this means that admins are entitled to topic ban any kind of disruption on the talk pages. The problem is that it seems to have been administered completely selectively by the banning admin. I think the only way is taking it to Arbcom directly (it has already been done i think) and either argue for lifting the ban or for exte ding it to the other side of the dispute as well (dab for example was specifically given restrictions for editing afrocentrist related articles when ArbCom placed the article on probation).·Maunus·ƛ· 22:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Just curious, am I allowed to edit the Ancient Egyptian Race Controversy article at this point? I sw your suggestion and I do not know the status as there has been no further clarity by the admins on the Clarification page. Is there any way to get a status update? And thanks. --Panehesy (talk) 01:35, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I would advise you not to edit it untill you are absolutely sure that you are no longer topic banned.·Maunus·ƛ· 01:39, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I think you would need to go to ArCom Enforcement and make an appeal. You could also approach the admin who banned you. Either way, I think that mediation is required. You and othe banned editors have to commit yourself to the view that dab and others whose approach to the article you reject are acting in good faith. The find someone from the mediation committee who would be willing to go back and forth and try to hammer out a framework for cooperation. I tried, on the article talk page and elsewhere, to suggest a compromise but my sense is no one accepts it. Unless you have a framework that various editors can work with, it is inevitable that the article will be protected or different editors banned. If you think I am wrong, appeal your ban at AE. Slrubenstein | Talk 09:26, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree, without an acceptance that DBachmann and others have acted in good faith, I doubt the bans would be lifted, and so far as Panhesy is concerned I'd like to see a withdrawal of the charges of racism. Dougweller (talk) 10:03, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Frankly, I would have no problem - as an admin - unilaterally cancelling Ice Cold Beer's bans ... except for the fact that it would be pointless right now. I beg Panehessy, dab, Zarah 1709, and Big Dynamo (just to name a few) to find a mediator that all would be willing to work with and by work with I mean accept compromises negotiated by the mediator. I believe if these four editors could agre on a mediator, and reach agreement on certain points, most others would follow. But there needs to be some mediation supported by the editors who are considered by others to be most extreme. I do not have the time to act as mediator even if I were asked so I do not feel comfortable lifting the ban. But I urge the people I have just named to find a mediator. And if these four cannot agree on a mediator, there is frankly little reason to think they will e able to agree on bigger or more complicated points in revising the article. Slrubenstein | Talk 10:13, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I noticed you were looking for the threads of the ANI topic. They are posted here

• hard link
• ANI archive.

I think Vassyana has offered to act as an informal mediator here. Wapondaponda (talk) 12:48, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Going Plaid

That's going to keep me chuckling all day. Thanks, Doc Tropics 16:32, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for catching my mistake (NPOV). As to the question itself, do you have any opinion? Debresser (talk) 12:06, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

In contrast to my proposal...

A common theme of the whole Advisory Council debate seems to be that the opponents of the idea perceive (in good faith) a much more restrictive or exclusive structure than what I think is intended by the proponents. This is the case with your comments about my proposal, which does not preclude the formation of think-tanks by anyone who wants to; it only recommends that a certain standard (a charter, certification, accreditation, what-have-you) be established to encourage good practices like transparency, diversity of membership, etc. and to discourage cabalism or anything that would give a particular group influence disproportionate to the quality of its analysis. Groups of editors that do not meet (or desire) such certification would not be prevented at all from coming up with ideas and proposing them, and members of the community could heed or ignore the certification however they wanted. Think of it as a seal of quality to give the consumer of ideas one additional way for judging between them. I was consciously trying to avoid heavy bureaucratic processes (like elections or new committees) but also to minimize actual restrictions or exclusions on who could participate in crafting recommendations. Perhaps my proposal was not written well enough to convey that -- but I think there's less contrast between your vision and mine than you seem to think. Not that I'm asking for your endorsement; I just hate being misunderstood. :) alanyst 21:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Fascism

Hi! I have noted my substantial agreement with the issues raised on the other page - thanks for calling my attention to it. Also my opinion oin WP "failing."

On T:F the issue (as always) is how to treat the dang "political spectrum" the last sections are the current bit for contention -- where the issue is now whether the starting sentence should be what is in the section, or be what they want the section to turn into <g>. Two editors seem h-bent that Fascism should be described solely as "extreme right wing" and want to use the OED as proof (this was discussed at RS/N but the OED was not favoured there). My problem is that dozens of major authors including Schlesinger (who is not RS because he wrote a "polemic" it seems to some) all have a problem with placing Fascism on the dang linear scale. Cheers! `Collect (talk)

Just read Rootology on the Talk page -- and the essay on why WP needs drastic changes <g>. my imaginations or is this a version of "Six Solutions in Search of a Problem" at times? Collect (talk) 14:25, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Nupedia

Nupedia doesn't exist it stopped existing in 2003, I agree with your comments, and don't like to see this little flaw make your otherwise sound arguments look bad. The other wikipedias are Citizendium and Conservapedia.·Maunus·ƛ· 15:38, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Article

Please Please do not distance yourself from the ancient egypt issue. Its about time someone stood up to dbachman and his henchman and said something about the abuse going on on wiki take a look at this. Dougweller posted this about good faith under a noninvolved user http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification#Statement_by_User:Dougweller. yet he also posted this ] About Panhesy comment on some one elses page. Is that asumming good faith? The truth is User:Dougweller have left many comments about other users edits to User:Dbachmann and most of it is relates to black people and Egypt. Just like during the time Dbachman decided to remove most of the information on this page Black_(hieroglyphic_'km')with no explanations and changed the name. Starting with this edit on June 10, 2009 4 other edit followed one on top of the other all with no explanations and because of it, an edit war erupted. he went and left Dbachman this message asking him to make your reverts for you because you didn’t want to violate 3RR ]. These people are not even half of the people how have been blocked wrongfully by these gang of administrators. And this article is only one of many. I took a look at Dougweller's block logs and just recently he blocked this editor User_talk:Bottracker on false accusations all because another editor User:Polly asked him to do so when he left this message on his talk page claiming there were issues concerning the editors images and that he did not want the editor to be able to upload images again ] he left a message telling Polly that you have given the editor a warning because you have to (I guess it was a way for it to appear proper) {]. And in a few minute after that warning he blocked the editor indefinitely from ever editing on Misplaced Pages based on nothing other than a request to do so. don't someone have to violate a warning in order for them to be blocked. This is similar to what they did to me last year I complained about him on Admin notice boards for some strange reason every complaint was removed my on of his "friends". Its quite shameful that someone can just leaves a message on their friends page and their friend do their dirty work for them and hide under the fact that he or she is an administrator. The administrator abuse on Misplaced Pages by Dbachman and his “friends” and the cry of afrocentricism for every thing have gone one long enough something needs to be done. 129.10.104.104 (talk) 17:11, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Note 3 is not what anyone here would call a sign of bad faith. Note 4 is not in reference to me. I do care about the general issue of racism at Misplaced Pages. But you have to understand that other things can cause conflict. Your methods for dealing with conflict have not been effective. I would be happy to explain it to you, but I am not sure you will understand. I am not patronizing you. But wikipedia, like e-mail and telephone calls - like all communication between strangers and non face-to-face, inevitably creates misunderstandings. It is not clear from what you wrote that you understand this, or know how to distinguish between different kinds of misunderstandings. Slrubenstein | Talk 18:16, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

"This is similar to what they did to me last year I complained about him on Admin notice boards for some strange reason every complaint was removed my on of his "friends"." Please provide me with an actual edit diff, thank you. Slrubenstein | Talk 18:17, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I have had many problems with Dbachman but he is not a racist and no one is going to make him go away. Therefore, there will be progress at Ancient Egyptian Race Controversy when banned users agree to mediation with Dbachman and others, and find a mediator that all find acceptable. If you wish to help your friends who have edited that article, then encourage them to seek mediation with dbachman and others. Slrubenstein | Talk 18:49, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Must be DNS problems or else my virus checker. I seem to be able to use the net now easily. Anyway, here is a sample diff , which also removed the 'retired' template. I'd already warned him about the copyright violations - his response was just to delete the warning. I could have blocked him just on the basis of the harassment of course. All he would have had to do to get unblocked was to apologise for the harassment and start discussing the copyright violations, but instead he just attacked everyone, another administrator declined to unblock him and in the end, because of his abuse, someone else blocked him from his talk page. He can still get unblocked however, an indefinite block is just that, indefinite. It can last minutes, days or years, but it is not a permanent block. Polly is not a friend, but it isn't unusual for editors who are not administrators to ask administrators for help. As for Panhesy, I seem to have misunderstood him and I've explained that on his talk page and mine. The hieroglyphic thing has very little to do with DBachmann, it was mainly to do with my uncertainty about it and asking an Egyptologist friend of mine, not a regular Misplaced Pages editor and not an administrator , Katherine Griffis Greenberg, to look at it. As someone who marched with Martin Luther King and who has blocked quite a few racists (and let me be clear, I mean 'whites' attacking 'blacks' and bigots attacking Jews) I strongly object to any suggestion that I am racist. I've got a long record elsewhere on the net, particularly Usenet, which can be searched to confirm this.

Damn, having a hard time again with the net. One other point. I only edit under my own name. Thus my actions are transparent. Whoever you are, 129.10.104.104, you can find out all about my Misplaced Pages activities, while I can't find out anything about yours. Dougweller (talk) 19:11, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Slrubenstein no note 4 is not in reference to you I meant to write he. Dougweller nice comment about Martin Luther king, but what does it have to do with anything. I never called you or anyone else a rasict. I just stated that these blocks and removal of information and refferences usaully occur with articles concerning egypt and black people and thats the truth. No one is making this about racism this is about abuse of power. Also why are you using this fake excuse, when Slrubenstein asked, you said that the User:Bottracker harassed User:Daisy1213 Yet it was the other way around. When you look at their conversation history bottracker sent daisy a Welcome tag then later sent her this ] telling her that she was putting wrong information on the page but User:Daisy1213 responded with this person attack] and if you read the conversation between them daisy1213 kept on provoking him. Yet you claim Bottracker was the one harassing her. If you were able to see the transcript of bottracker losing his temper then you where also able to see that daisy started it with many personal attacks yet, why wasn’t daisy1213 blocked for “harassment” as well. And you say that you would unblock bottracker if he apologized. Well apologize to who and for what? This injustice on Misplaced Pages is just not right. Yor really didn't valid reason to block this guy. Just like you didn't have one when you blocked me. It is typical that when issue like admin abuse are brought up it gets pushed and twisted up into something else such as racism or afrocentrisim or whatever. People come here because they want to contribute to articles and just because your are given some authority as an administrator does not mean you can do as you please. It is also very ironic that this same daisy1212 you claim Bottracker harassed has left a message on her talk page telling people if they have question or problems with her edits, they should take it up with you User_talk:Daisy1213. I guess you’re her personal bodyguard. Kind of like how User:Polly he left you this message on your talk page tellimg you to block Bottracker and that he did not want the editor to be able to upload images again, ]There are rule everyone must follow My block was even more bizarre and strange. Slrubenstein, Sure thing I will get you the transcripts of when my complaints about them on the notice boards where removed. They blocked me last year so I need time to search for them I am sure they have been archived by now.

129.10.104.131 (talk) 19:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)