User talk:Kirbytime: Difference between revisions

I always respond to messages here.

Chronological Archives
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 Topical Archives
munafiqun

{{Afghanistan-newspaper-stub}}

Hi - I see you have recently created a new stub type. As it states at Wikipedia:Stub, at the top of most stub categories, and in many other places on Wikipedia, it is recommended that new stub types are proposed prior to creation at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, in order to check whether the new stub type is already covered by existing stub types, whether it is named according to stub naming guidelines, whether it reaches the standard threshold for creation of a new stub type, and whether it crosses existing stub type hierarchies. Your new stub type is currently listed at WP:WSS/D - please feel free to make any comments there as to any rationale for this stub type. And please, in future, consider proposing new stub types first! Grutness...wha? 10:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

72 virgins

This is not POV. Its based on article. Your edit here was thus invalid. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 17:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I wonder if this was you. It came right after the edit from your username. I dont know if that message is true. The truth is that editors are eventually suceeding in getting information in Wikipedia, if you look at the past of how this encyclopedia has been. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 18:09, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

WP:CABAL.--Kirby♥time 18:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

... and WP:AGF. ITAQALLAH 18:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

See if you guys can participate here. I want to add this to the article when we get the lock out. Suggest improvements on the page page. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 18:53, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Do you know what a merge means? Move the material into Houri which you deleted here. Exciting changes await this article. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 21:25, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Trolling and soapboxing...

I really don't see how I'm trolling or soapboxing by pointing out that an article that criticizes Israel gets a lot more interest than one that is about the conditions of Palestinians. The suggestion I made was earnest and constructive, and one can only take note of the reaction. I'd be absolutely fine reporting this to the Admin board, so feel free to revert again. --Leifern 20:09, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Constructive for what??? You're assuming bad faith on the part of all editors who disagree with you. And not just that, you're grouping them all together and claiming that all of them, collectively, use double standards in a very specific and identical way. That is clearly trolling.--Kirby♥time 20:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Though I didn't find that section particularly helpful or constructive either, I'm not seeing the section in WP:TALK that actually backs up deleting it. Did you mean to link to a different guideline? Bladestorm 20:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I didn't expect there to be so much controversy regarding this. I will not remove the section anymore. Bladestorm, I removed it per WP:ATTACK#Removal_of_text, which is linked from WP:TALK. I've done this beforehere, and nobody complained about that, and in fact one user thanked me for it.--Kirby♥time 20:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I did not make any assertions about any or all editors that disagree with me, and I clearly juxtaposed "some" vs "the vast majority," and made it clear this was my conclusion. --Leifern 20:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

That doesn't matter. I still would like to know how your comment is constructive towards improving the article. Pointing fingers doesn't help one lick.--Kirby♥time 20:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Signature

I just noticed you had changed it. Thank you very much :) Viridae^Talk 23:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help

with various articles. Thanks very much. Cheers, --Aminz 08:03, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Standardising Qur'an citations

Hi, as someone who edits Islam related articles, I was wondering if you could comment on my proposal for standardising the citation of the Qur'an using a single template. Thanks. → Aktar ^{(talk • contribs)} — 21:42, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Houri

What exactly is being violated here in terms of NPOV and UNDUE? Just because you know the shortcuts or the terms, doesnt mean you can revert stuff without explanation and just give the shortcuts there in the summary. Explain now on the talk page of the article. The more you do this, the more good information I'll get into that article - you can count on that. And if you look at history, thats how its been - the truth gets there eventually. And now notability is established for FFI, so I guess you cant put the tag back there anymore. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 04:27, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:TRUTH.--Kirby♥time 18:18, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:NOTPOLICY. | --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 00:37, 4 May 2007 (UTC)