Talk:Vampire/Archive 5

message: Since wruitten records ( that the public can get thierh ands on) havnt reallly survbived in large quantitiies from the ages  of ong ago, as it were, im going ot put in that since reccords havnt survived, its actually impossible to proove or disproove the vclaims in the pathology section.  Also, the section labelled "modern real vamppiriism" isnt actually the vampire subculture, theres no significant overlap, so that section shall be reinserted as well.  dontworry though, i can do it without reversion.Gavin the Chosen 10:37, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The kind of written records you are talking about have no relationship at all to the claims in the pathology section. The pathology section talks about people who came up with theories about the origin of vampires that mention features of modern fiction and not folklore, and also frequently get facts wrong about those conditions, so it can be proven wrong right away... Your edits have already been rejected by a number of editors, putting them back will just cause them to be taken out again. Save yourself the trouble. DreamGuy 10:47, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
why dont you qait, and see if other peole, without your behest, actually do like or diwslike them?  Ive tried very hard to do this properly, so please dont start soe edit warr type nonsense.  the records im talking about are medical type tyexts that were destroyed in the dark ages, just to tell you.Gavin the Chosen 10:49, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

text: "Medical type tyexts that were destroyed in the dark ages" makes absolutely no sense at all for what's under discussion. And if you didn't want "edit warr type nonsense" you wouldn't be insisting upon adding your content back in over and over again. You just got back from yet another block for edit warring and you feel the need to blame other people for it? You aren't even trying to understand the things that are explained to you, you just mindlessly do the same thing over and over to get your version back. DreamGuy 11:54, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
just becaues HE doesnt like my attempts to improove this article, he keeps removing them,  wpuld people please assit me in stopping DramGuys drstructive edits?Gavin the Chosen 11:55, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  my next edit 

message: it flows better, and its more accurate and specific then  plain old magician.Gavin the Chosen 13:22, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  use of corcerer 

message: Until 1823, when it was made illegal, it was common practice in England to drive a stake through the heart of suicides. In Romania, red-hot bars were often used. The vampire's body whould then be burned or reburied at a crossroads.--Kim Nevelsteen 16:01, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  of interest? 

message: Can you please tell me the source of this
" the Orthodox church believed incorrupt bodies were saints while Catholic
believe they are vampires"
Yes, Orthodoxy believes that saint bodies remain incorrupt but this
has nothing to do the Vampires (which exist in all Slavic
nation traditions) - AND SOMEONE MIGHT THINK THAT OUR
SAINTS ARE VAMPIRES :-)
See ... so rethink, redo.
Or I`ll do it :-)
--Rastavox 01:28, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orthodox Vampires 

message: in Ann Rice's 'interview with the vampire' (or the novel-turned-movie rather). 
Lestat had drank some dead kid's blood and went all wild and stuff. is there a reason for that?
(just a quick question, i hope i put it at the right place. will delete afterwards)
thx (comment unsigned, but by User:70.70.209.80)
It's kind of like orgasmic for him I guess. No clue. It seems to be such a big deal for him. No clue why. Just is. I am a vampire (yes there are modern day one) so I know I should be able to tell you about it, but I truthfully have no clue why. TearAwayTheFunerealDress 15:16, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Because we'll obviously accept your esteemed testimony for what it is, oh vampire.  That I can promise.  Don't get me wrong, I'd be overjoyed if you were.  Proof of the supernatural, bam!  Mwehehe Jachra 10:25, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  question 

message: From Coleridge's Christabel:
The lady sank, belike through pain,
And Christabel with might and main
Lifted her up, a weary weight,
Over the threshold of the gate :
Then the lady rose again,
And moved, as she were not in pain.''
It isn't spelled out, but this seemed close enough to the "can't enter without an invitation" superstition to be worth mentioning. --Calair 00:00, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Invitation