User talk:Pitchka: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:18, 16 December 2005

RFC User Conduct Pitchka

You are notified of an RFC underway into your conduct.

Dwain, It took me about 15 minutes to check the census records at my library. It says that this William Webb was born in 1905 on two census' that disproves all the other sources I was relying upon and feel that wiki should be the one to correct the myth! And Dwain, call me Mike! MichaelMoore 16:37, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Loretto Chapel

Thanks for your additions to Loretto Chapel. Given your user page, I'm not sure how you'll take this, but I toned down the miracle references a bit since, to me, your version read as "a miracle happened (and some people doubt it)". Since all of the references I have found saying "a miracle happened" come more-or-less directly from the Chapel, I find those dubious. Also, could you cite the sources for a few things. For example "The architect died suddenly and it was only after much of the chapel was contructed that the builders realized it was lacking any type of stairway to the choir loft."?

Again, thanks for the additions. —BenFrantzDale 00:56, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category: First Families of Virginia

Thanks for the encouragement! Feel free to add this category to any and all current and future FFV people. I probably won't have time to do all that. For future reference, if you want to link to a Category page (on a talk page, for instance) without adding the talk page to the category, simply add a colon before the word 'Category' inside the brackets. If you want look at the following link in edit mode Category: First Families of Virginia. I just realized this about a month ago. MPS 21:31, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic issues

Hi, Dwain. You might be interested in this and this. If you feel like contributing, that would be great. If not, no problem. You may also be interested in Ordination of women. Regards, Ann Heneghan ^(talk) 18:29, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Take a look Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alice Barrows.

Again

They just won't give it up Wikipedia:Categories for deletion#Category:Soviet spies to Category:Alleged Soviet spies

Actress Stacy Armstrong

Hi, I'm writing because I saw that you edited an article on Stacy Kernweis sometime ago. Well, an earlier article under her maiden name Stacy Armstrong was deleted and now the whole deletion is in question because the vote should have been judged no concensus. But it was deleted anyway! This latest article might be up for deletion next!!

The original article is now being rejudged and you can vote on it if you'd like at Stacy Armstrong

Just thought you might like to know! Plank 18:31, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for your help at Category:Soviet spies. Let me know if I can ever help on anything. nobs 18:29, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Check it out. Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/MONGO nobs 19:19, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

MONGO RfA

I wanted to thank you for voting support on my RfA. I also see that you have some interaction regarding of which I am, I have been told, a member of. Anyway, I thank you for your support and don't hesitate to let me know if there is anything I can do for you.--MONGO 08:22, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On the List of Roman Catholics

Thank you for notifying me once again that this article is on the verge of deletion. As you would expect, I find it absurd that this is happening, and even so that it is happening for the second time.--Thomas Aquinas 22:18, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On the Catholic Church of Wikipedia

As you have described yourself as a Catholic, I thought I would alert you as a co-religionist to your opportunity to delete the particularly offensive article, Wikipedia:Catholic Church of Wikipedia.--Thomas Aquinas 22:20, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A Message to Pro-Life Wikipedians

The section "Foetal Pain" (Fetal Pain) has been deleted from the Abortion article. Could you help restore it? If you would like to see what was deleted, go to my talk page, scroll to "Fetal Pain," and click the provided link.--Thomas Aquinas 22:31, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-life celebrities/politicians

I can't stop the deletion of that category, there are too many delete votes. I'm sorry. I don't agree with it, but it is most certainly going to get deleted by the Deletionists. I repeat, I am very sorry, as I do not see any confliction with the NPOV policy anywhere about the category. I have tried many times to keep the articles as I see fit, and the ones I think are not conflicting with the NPOVs, but I must stand down on this one. If you rally more Wikipedians behind it's support, you can count on me, and I will put my vote on the RfD page. Эрон Кинней 00:37, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

BC prob

There is a problem with wikipedians changing the Euripides pages dating system to BCE/CE... especially SlimVirgin. I want to explain the situation incase you can help...I originally tried to change a wikipedia page from BCE/CE to BC/AD User:Shanes told me it's wiki policy to use the dates out lined by the creator of the page. I searched and found that the Euripides page originally used the BC/AD dating system and changed it with a summary. Now others are putting it back to BCE/CE. Can you help? Chooserr

I have been threatened with blocking so if I'm not here tomorow you'll know I was unfairly blocked for reverting the dating system to what the article originally had before secularists decided that we'll change it to BCE/CE despite wiki policy. Chooserr

Thank you for your help on the Euripides page, Chooserr

User:Sortan insists on changing Mathura back to BCE/CE...despite my summary...Is there a Catholic Admin who could block him? Chooserr

Jesus

Check out the Jesus article and edit it to keep it focused on Jesus and a biographical account of Him. Watch the Jesus page to keep it focused on Him. Thank you. Scifiintel 22:34, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

BC watch

Sophocles had BC/AD dates until 2 days ago when it was changed. After being banned I promised - I'm not sure who exactly, but I did and don't want to break it - that I wouldn't revert unless theres been some discussion on the matter. So if you would like you can add your opinion. Thank you, Chooserr

Thank you for your help on the Sophocles page. Chooserr

Pro-life Alliance

The article Pro-Life Alliance has been nominated for deletion. Chooserr

Can you help

I would appreciate help with watching LIFE (Charity) and Central Catholic Library both of which I feel have merit and are only being classified unencyclopedic because the "editor" has a grudge against me. Chooserr

Howie carr related blanking

Per SCZenz's request, I have listed the blanking/copyright events involving 24.147.103.146 (and later 204.169.116.1 at WP:AN/I. If theres anything i've missed about these events please feel free to add. Thanks again for your help. -Lanoitarus _^(talk) .:. 00:36, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your comment -- Thanks Dwain, I definitely went from grateful (for pointing out plagarism) to annoyed (for the blanking and such) with this guy too. I just hope this is the end of it- I fear we may hear more when the block expires. Thanks for your help! -Lanoitarus _^(talk) .:. 03:40, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

BCE user

The user who keeps changing it it 68.121.145.34. Chooserr 02:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment left on your user page reproduced here

Hello, I just reverted your user page. It wasn't really vandalized, but an anonymous user at the IP 70.18.170.152 left the following comment there instead of here –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 22:11, 12 December 2005 (UTC):[reply]

Hi, I am sorry to invade your page. Remove this message when you get a chance but I had to contact you and say as a passive anon contributor to Wikipedia, I am alarmed to see how the once-beautiful Pius XII article went down the toilet and is not 90% Dan Brown style nonsense and anti-Catholic diatribe masquerading as scholarship. This version: 14:11, 3 October 2005 Str1977 m (rst balance) is an example when the article was great and within the past 6-7 weeks, a few people have destroyed the article probably b/c it didn't paint the anti-Catholic picture they wanted it to. All the great quotes from prominent Jews have been removed and replaced by Cornwell screed hyperbole. Removing the quotes of every Jew from Einstein to Golda Maier is really a new form of antisemitism, but I am sure that will go right over the ehads of the anti-Catholic aparatchiks intent on the triumph of Cornwell's wholly unscholarship and unhistorical text book example of an ad hominem attack. I don't know if you can rally other Catholics/truth seekers into getting that article back into shape but that would be time well spent. I notice the Muslims diligently police their pages and won't permit even the mention of Mohammed's 12 year old wife (fact) but this Pius XII article goes on and on with BS. Incredible!

Jack Nicholson

Hello, Nicholson has said he is pro choice yet anti abortion, many pro choice people are still anti abortion. Regards Arniep 14:18, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Edward "Punchy" Mclaughlin

Hey again, thanks for your continued help trying to fight back the craziness surrounding the boston mob articles- I think you're the only one besides me still watching them, so I really appreciate the help. Just a quick comment: It would really help me out if you could try to be more accurate with your edit comments. For instance, this edit was labeled as "add category", even though the article was essentially completely reverted. I agree with you on the reversion 100%, but its just misleading as I almost reverted it myself again not realizing that you had =). Thanks! -Lanoitarus _^(talk) .:. 18:56, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake!

I simply looked at Category:Abortion and carelessly put the celebs in the wrong category. My mistake and I apoligize. I am sure that you can now see, however, that your new categoy, "Anti-Abortion" is already covered by the "Pro-Life" categories and that the "cfd" tag I added is justified. -- 69.181.82.102 21:04, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bernard "Bernie" McLaughlin

I agree, but I thought we should go about this the right way, so I moved the anon's rewrite to the temp page, and added a comment on the Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2005 December 9 (right above yours on the H. Paul Rico "copyvio").

I should, though, temper my agreement with you by mentioning that I think the articles all pretty much started out as actual copyvios, although claims about the images were always bogus (I'm not sure that the anon understands what we're saying, or if he's just playing dumb). I'm curious, too, about whether he ever actually filed a take-down notice. Maybe you're right, that he has nothing to do with Howie Carr, but if so, why the rabid attack on these things? -- Mwanner | Talk 17:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have put the anon on warning, several times, although it is quite hard becaus he uses 5 or 6 different IPs at what appears to be a school computer lab. I agree with 24.147.103.146 that the Bernie Mclaughlin article does appear to be a bit too close to the original, perhaps we can make it a bit more fact based and be done with it. In general user 24.147.103.146 has been responding to reason since coming off his previous block. Also, he does appear to be related to Carr at least somehow, because the same day he sarted complaining about the "stolen" images, all the images on carrs site got watermarked.-Lanoitarus _^(talk) .:. 17:57, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This type of censorship makes me sick

Vote to keep, show these hypocrites what's what, tolerance? ha, only when it's good for them--Diatrobica;l 23:14, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-life/Pro-choice celebrities

I see that you have told Chooserr that the Category:Pro-life celebrities is up for deletion as part of an offensive by "abortion zealots." I am the one who nominated the category for deletion, and I hope you will note that I nominated Category:Pro-choice celebrities for deletion as well. I think it is completely unencyclopedic to categorize "celebrities" (the Britney Spears's, Justin Timberlakes and Matt Damons of this world) by where they stand on abortion. Aecis ^praatpaal 00:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I hate to burst your precious little bubble here, but... I consider myself to be a pro-lifer... Aecis ^praatpaal 00:08, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gay rights in Iraq

You listed yourself as Roman Catholic so I thought I might bring this unencyclopedic total POV pushing article to your attention. It is currently up for deletion here. Chooserr 00:16, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 129: / Line 129: @@
 I see that you have told [[User talk:Chooserr|Chooserr]] that the [[:Category:Pro-life celebrities]] is up for deletion as part of an offensive by "abortion zealots." I am the one who nominated the category for deletion, and I hope you will note that I nominated [[:Category:Pro-choice celebrities]] for deletion as well. I think it is completely unencyclopedic to categorize "celebrities" (the Britney Spears's, Justin Timberlakes and Matt Damons of this world) by where they stand on abortion. [[User:Aecis|Aecis]] [[User_talk:Aecis|<sup>praatpaal</sup>]] 00:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 :I hate to burst your precious little bubble here, but... I consider myself to be a pro-lifer... [[User:Aecis|Aecis]] [[User_talk:Aecis|<sup>praatpaal</sup>]] 00:08, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
+== [[Gay rights in Iraq]] ==
+You listed yourself as [[Roman Catholic]] so I thought I might bring this unencyclopedic total POV pushing article to your attention. It is currently up for deletion [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gay_rights_in_Iraq here]. [[User:Chooserr|Chooserr]] 00:16, 16 December 2005 (UTC)