Datasets:

pt-sk

/

toxic_classification

like 0

You were blocked for violating 3rr. An obvious, obvious policy. You were warned two times here on your talk page about viloating 3rr prior to getting the 24hr block. You ignored those warnings and continued to violate 3rr and were therefore blocked. Using your talk page to rally against Wikipedia and misrepresent the reasons for your 24 hour block are in violation of Wikipedia:User_page#What_can_I_not_have_on_my_user_page.3F

::Thank you. I would compose one if I were familiar with the topic. User:Ceyockey ('''')

the mulims were very religouse people the quran was made by mohammad to tell an every day life

== CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT == CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT CUNT V

I came hear to learn the same thing. I think on this one you really need to provide an explanation as a part of the close. Thanks!

# It's Funny How A Hunny Ain't Sweet Like Sugar BITCHES!!!! BeBiTa

" To reply on what Frank Close actually says: ;Extracts from Chapter 9, The Infinity Puzzle, 2013. Relevant snips underlined, rest is to add context * Although several people discovered the mechanism whereby vector gauge bosons can acquire mass, Brout and Englert being the first to publish a relativistic demonstration, only Higgs drew attention to the consequential existence of a massive scalar particle, which now bears his name. * By the late summer of 1964 they [Guralnik and Hagen] had ""pretty much everything but still had concerns over some fine details."" His former mentor Walter Gilbert was lecturing at a summer school at Lake Como, so Guralnik made a special trip to tell him what they had achieved.... At the very time when Guralnik was talking with Gilbert, Higgs’s paper was already in production. This would become apparent only later... * Unaware of this even more precious jewel that lay just out of their reach, Guralnik and Hagen drafted a manuscript, and showed it to Kibble, asking for any additional input. Fate was about to deal them a cruel blow. During 1964 Britain had had a series of postal strikes, which had delayed the mail. Their memory of events, as described in several accounts,[29] is that as they were about to send the final version of their manuscript to PRL, Kibble came in and announced that in the backlog of mail were ""three papers, one by Robert Brout and François Englert... and two by Peter Higgs."" All three also seemed to have discovered how a gauge boson could become massive. * Guralnik, Hagen, and Kibble’s work was tightly argued and contained unique insights toward understanding the depth of these new ideas. However, the sad fact was that they had been scooped. They added references to those papers into the text but changed nothing, nor did they add anything as a result of what had happened. They sent the manuscript to Physical Review Letters, where it was received on October 12, 1964.... By that oversight, they had implicitly placed themselves as runners-up... * Gerald Guralnik was one of those who approached the finishing line early but failed to publish fast enough. * In another of the coincidences in this tale, the editor of PRL received Higgs’s manuscript on the very same day that Brout and Englert’s paper was published. When Higgs’s paper finally appeared in print, on October 19, Brout and Englert were surprised to see that it included a reference to their own: ""He couldn’t have seen our paper, so how did he know of it?"" Higgs explained: Nambu had been the referee of both papers and ""had drawn attention to the work of Brout and Englert. I added a remark about their work."" Their researches were truly independent; in 1964 manuscripts were typed and then submitted by the regular mail. [...] There is no dispute that Brout and Englert were first to complete and first to publish. So why is it that Higgs’s name is associated with the massive boson and not those of Englert or Brout? The answer is that so far everyone has been addressing what happened to Goldstone’s massless boson. However, there remains the issue of Goldstone’s other boson—the massive one. This is what Higgs had uniquely included in his revised paper, the one that appeared in PRL. Two years later, he developed the ideas in a longer paper, setting in motion the events that would make his name. * So it was that Brout, Englert, and Higgs had all published papers, while GHK were writing their own paper, ignorant of developments due to the British postal strike until the fateful moment when Kibble announced the news. * Tom Kibble recalled: ""As a matter of fact [in 1964] the Higgs Boson was not seen by anyone as a particularly important feature. The interest [then] was in the way the gauge vector bosons acquired a mass, eating up the Goldstone [massless] Boson on the way. Now of course it’s important because... its observation would confirm the validity of the theory."" ... Kibble’s perception of the perceived unimportance historically is in accord with the memories of others, which were aired when the six shared the Sakurai Prize in 2010. For Englert and Brout, ""This was our first paper in field theory and we were somewhat isolated. We didn’t know about Glashow’s work [on the SU2 × U1 model of the weak and electromagnetic forces] at all."" * During the International Conference on High Energy Physics at Berkeley in 1966, Ben Lee prominently referred to the “Higgs Boson” and the “Higgs Mechanism.” ... As the GHK team, including Hagen, had not completed their paper until after the appearance of Higgs’s original papers, and as Higgs had built on this further during 1966, with a study of how

What makes you think I'm a kid? I'm that gay prostitute you got last night. It was fun.

soory Pal I don't know who you are. You didn't sign. You need to validate to me what POV push, is cause I bet you have one too!

" :::::I agree completely with Arnoutf. Factor, you seem to be here with an axe to grind: we don't need to rejig the article to highlight the wickedness of Hitler or the crimes committed by Germany (and Germans) as you are proposing given that this comes through strongly from providing a ""flat"" history of the war. ::::::No, I am not here to grind an axe; I'm here to try and provide a more accurate picture of the events; and your constant dismissal of my suggestions using the ""neutrality"" excuse is starting to lose validity, as I continually provide facts that weaken your arguments. I'm basing my ideas of how an article of such magnitude should be presented using the WORLD WAR 1 page as a benchmark. In it, you will find a section called Genocide and ethnic cleansing. Imagine that! A section called ""genocide"" Why the heck do you not have a stronger emphasis like that on the WORLD WAR 2 page, where they were murdering people on an industrial scale! The issue here is more than a paragraph about the Poles or the Soviets… it is that you as a ""moderator"" make every effort possible to water down the brutal truth behind the WWII conflict. In fact, I still would like you to comment on my reply regarding the German Election issue, where I challenge your misinformed statement about the nature of the German electorate, and their support for Hitler. The WWII article needs to highlight the following point: ::::::*German Elections of 1932, where Hitler received substantial support (if not a complete majority) from the German voters ::::::*Renaming the ""Concentration camps and slave work"" section to ""The Holocaust, concentration camps and slave labor"" ::::::*Include a short paragraph about the German SS atrocities in Poland, and USSR; including examples of specific operations ::::::I do not think that those requests will somehow alter the neutrality of the article as these events happened; and they happened on a massive scale. For example the German SS had over a 1,200,00 paramilitary troops, and their impact on the conduct of the war can not be understated. Yet, is there any real mention of their activities and objectives? The answer is… NO! "

== ??? == I just want to know her eye color.

" : But ... the approximate dates aren't exact and are actually contradicted in the text - we're better off giving the context than misleading folks with the parentheticals. The timeline is subject to the same issue - it makes things look neat and tidy when they aren't. And the sentence which you added about Pirenne is unsourced - this is a FA ... everything is sourced. You added it in before a sentence sourced to Mommsen's ""Petrarch's Conception of the Dark Ages"" - but nothing in Mommsen's article discusses what you added at all. - "

fuck, go ahead and block me you tosser. you think i give a rats ass about being blocked?

:It was mostly used for spam.

Neopets screenshot You seem to have a dynamic IP. I had left you a note at , which apparently you didn't recieve. I hope you get this, since there is no other way for me to send you this message. Please don't remove the screenshot (if you disagree, please post on Talk:Neopets first), and thank you!

I'll edit in a fashion that I'll find the most suitable (shouldn't you have bigger things to worry about). You should be glad that I care about perfection!

|Paralympics=yes |importance=low

== Abkhazia AfD== Thanks for the heads up. 22:25, 1 October 2009

" April 2010 (UTC) == Leading nationalist organization in Romania? == What exactly makes it ""the leading nationalist organization in Romania"" ??? :The sheer number of members , sympathizers and media coverage would suffice . 01:31, 24"

::, I know about 1RR. That is spelled out in the Edit screen. A pedicure is fingernails. Pediatrics is health care for children. Planned Parenthood does not offer pedicures for any of their clients. Some PP affiliates do offer pediatric care. My 1RR was to leave pediatrics intact. What is the fair edit you speak of? I did not revert any edit that stated that PP offers pediatrics. Cheers!

I am from Denmark, and I have heard this band for the first time. Forget all this notability crap ... the band consists simply of good musicians playing fine folk metal. Everyone who knows a bit about this issue can hear it. DON'T DELETE!!!

" It is also salient to note that clear disdain RCooley has for Wikipedia (have a look on his page) where his says: ""I QUIT It's clear Wikipedia will eventually devolve into a lot of bias and misinformation. The policies are idiotic, and I've needlessly wasted ridiculous amounts of time. And even tring to come back in a small way (the Shadow Wiki remains...), I kept hitting unnecessary and nonsensical bureaucratic roadblocks."" Also, note the defamation that RCooley has enabled within Wiki against one of the researchers who does fractal antenna work. "

.....gingers have no soul they are the spawn of satan

****** Girl is PI, Lady is anachronistic, there's a difference. Like saying Gentleman

" == Could you have a look at an article for me? == Hello Peter - good to see you back on Wikipedia again - could I please ask you to have a look at a short article I wrote on Hardwicke Knight, to check to make sure that i haven't made any silly mistakes? Thanks, James - ... "

Feb 2005 (UTC) *Fuck off, Nazi. And goodbye; have fun with your new encyclopedia. 02:52, 8

:::I have a question for you, since you are a real big fan of Ann B. Davis. Does she go out of her way to be ugly, or is it just natural for her? Let's face it - she is one ugly dude.

,And being gay and retarded Champion

Or at least explain how we can access them online.

:More like your anti-Semitic rant Citation got you no where and now your pissed off. Cordially

*My niggeez Auranor know 'sup. Neea know how 2 agree wit a muthafucka, niggaz.

Is the Premacy using the same platform as the Mazda5?

:The Smithsonian account is measured and undramatic, as you would expect. Choosing to go with the prevailing winds seems very sensible at first glance. After all, it took another nine years after the first Atlantic heavier than air non-stop crossing to go the other way (Junkers W.33). I guess low altitude wind patterns may be a bit less consistent overland, but W-E would be your first choice. The Smithsonion does not say why they changed their minds, but de Leeuw's explanation, that going E-W avoided an early, rapid and heavily laden climb, sounds plausible. I wonder when the first W-E US coast to coast non-stop flight was made.

== Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates#Consensus and (archived) FACs == Nancy, I archived the off-topic portion of the discussion at the above FAC talk thread. Just to clarify, I don't have a horse in this race, but the back-and-forth discussion between you and others was escalating at an alarming pace. I want to assure you that I am neutral, do not hold a grudge or any ill feelings against you, and have no opinion on the subject of discussion. Hopefully the issue can be resolved, but perhaps the article's talk page or a user talk page is a better place. Cheers,

" :First of all, memory usage of many OSes is, to put it mildly, absurd. :XP was quite bad in that regard when it came out, mostly because it was the first ""NT"" OS for desktop PCs. Before XP, one used to have 98, which came with its own DOS, and took about 16 megabytes of RAM and 120 on the HDD to run almost decently. XP, however, took 128 megabytes of RAM and more than 1G on the HDD. Not the minimum figures but the ones for decent performance. I was a late adopter to XP as well (late 2005/early 2006). By then, PCs were quite XP-capable. :Vista was quite disgusting. It was like MS doubted themselves that they could make anything better than XP. They started with a name of ""Longhorn."" On top of that, Vista came with a RAM footprint of 512M (and that was more sluggish than XP at 128) and an out-of-this-world 15G on the HDD. :That's a factor of 6 (I'd guess it would run as fast as XP on 128 then) to 10 compared to XP. And all that for the sole purpose of implementing... :Wait... no, that's not quite it. Hold on another sec. :I give up. Beats me what the heck they implemented. ( :To make a long story short, one has a new Windows, and that's it. Its GUI is queer, it's incompatible to XP either, and its footprint is absurd. There might be some changes under the hood, but it all boils down to the car analogy, ""Yeah, the engine block is a bit on the heavy side, 5,000 pounds is the heaviest so far, by far, but we achieved a 5% better fuel economy. If your vehicle weighs in at 100,000 pounds or more, you'll be glad you bought our Vista engine."" - Which means that the car will consume more fuel not less. Unless your other car is an Abrams. :BTW, I doubt they achieved as much as a 5% savings. :I read one post once where somebody wrote that MS ""made his computer look like one of those digital atrocities in CSI Miami"" , and from the quick glance I had at Vista, he's right. There was talk about the memory growth which is still exponential (although post-Vista OSes are not that bad at it - they still manage to shave some megabytes off without major sacrifice) while the feature set was approaching a limit. I'd say it's not that bad, but it could be logarithmic. ;) :Personally, I don't care a bug's ass about all the ""features"" they keep bullhorning - I don't want a tablet, I don't need one, and I would prefer a sleek little OS that runs my programs the way they're meant to run. I don't need a 28"" HD display either. I don't write my letters in landscape format, and even if I did, a 4:3 display would have the width for it. I don't want a 3"" display in portrait format either - and I don't want any hardware by companies struggling to assemble a decent phone. But I digress. :DOS was made in months if not weeks, by an 8-man team to boot, and now MS can't come up with a decent successor to XP? In one decade??? My thought is they could but why try if everyone's gonna buy Vista, 7 etc. anyway. If the vast majority of customers were reasonable enough to abstain and continued to use XP, they'd be amazed at how quickly MS would come up with something better. They did it once, when Vista didn't sell too well. One could only guess what they would have come up with if Vista had sold even worse. :About the ""We won't support XP beyond 20xx"" threat, I can only say ""LOLwut? Is u serious? We cease to buy your craptacular OSes and your threat is to cease to break XP?"" As blatant as some security flaws are, other companies are quite up to the task of fixing them if MS don't. And they would not mess up the processes we do want on our PCs. Actually, some security suites made quite a mess (deleting SvcHost.exe is my all-time fave) but at least not as regularly as, say, SP2 did. :Bottom line, XP was steep when it came up, but its successors are completely off, and they don't begin to come up with anything significant. Changes - lots. Advantages - no. There's still no decent multitasking support. For example, menus close when a different window steals focus. And there's not evena DOS-style ""Abort/retry/skip"" choice when one of a batch of files cannot be copied or deleted. :I won't say anything too subjective about Bill G here - WP:BLP and stuff - but if there's consensus that ""living"" is to be judged by brain activity, Bill could be in for a good whacking... - ¡Ouch! ( / ) "

== My songs == Thank you for your helpful comments in the FA review of my songs!

:I've put a couple refs in there as well as expanding it a bit.

:Thank you for your quick response. I apologize if this has been a distraction for you. Sincerely,

" ==A few section changes== When I was reading through the article, the contents of ""Historical view and usage"" threw me for a loop because most of the section discussed the nature/ontology of the Trinity in the modern (unqualified) sense. The bit on history seemed like a good lead in, so I changed the second level heading to ""Ontology of the Trinity"" and made ""Historical view and usage"" the first subsection. The bit on ""Christian Life and the Blessed Trinity"" also seemed out of place as that section discusses the implications or application of the concept of Trinity, and not the nature of Trinity itself. So, I moved that to be a second level section after the section on dissent, figuring that it would read best as ""point/counterpoint"" and then onto a new subject. Speaking of sections, it seems that the ""Historical view and usage"" section should be merged with the ""Historical development"" section. I thought I'd leave this change to the more involved authors, though. "

" ::::: ""Bias"" is a bizarre inference here. There's no suggestion of a conclusion of any sort, or even a relationship of their friendship to Block's view. Bink, you don't think Block is biased in his view of H4, do you? It's a straw man. "

:I personally don't have any problem with the number of images, but if we're going to get rid of any, I vote for: grey, humanvulva, fem_isa, in that order. I think the Clitoris Inner Anatomy and Saravulva images are the most useful, the humanvulva is the most useless, the and the grey is the most gross.

" :Cybermud, when you wrote that you felt that the statement ""all men are rapists"" should be included in this article, were you talking about Andrea Dworkin's views? "

fuck off

"The whole breast fetish issue could be addressed with a short description and a link. Having the weird photograph with the gagged woman serves to bring up strange undertones, not to help the reader understand what a breast is. I recommend that the photo be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by == image caption == there is an image caption that reads ""In Western culture, it is acceptable for breasts to be partially uncovered."" Acceptable? What workplaces, community programs or schools find that acceptable? I am going to re-write the caption. "

==Agreement== Ok, how about this: you both agree (by positive confirmation on my talk page), that if I unprotect the page now, you both agree not to make any edits to that list until you have reached consensus on the version at Wikipedia:Sandbox/List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita‎. You will let me know that you have consensus by both stating so on the sandbox talk page. At that time, I will merge the pages to preserve page histories. If either of you fail to abide by this agreement, you will be blocked for 7 days. Sound reasonable? —   · :I agree without hesitation. ☆ ''' :Me too. :P.S. The time here (where I live) is 1:25 after midnight, so I'm going to sleep awhile. see you tomorrow. Goodbye. ::Ok, done! I wish you success in reaching consensus here. (And goodnight, Eliko.) —   ·'''

Cheeky, an undeclared fork.  | 

" == Comments == Hi. Todd May here. One small comment about the biography. I am referred to as helping to develop the program of ""postanarchism."" That is actually not a term I use, and it has come to signify something like ""after anarchism."" My own views are actually a melding of poststructuralism and anarchism, with no particular ""post"" part. This is a small point, and no one should go to great trouble to change it, but I have noticed that I'm getting referred to in other literature as among a group of postanarchists that I don't believe I belong in. Thanks. "

" ::::By all means give me a reason why I shouldn't presume the worst from these admins, given what's happened to me. Perhaps you can have a go at filling out a response to the block review yourself, as a thought experiment. It's taking them a hell of a long time to do it after all, far longer than any of the other decisions that they've taken which involved bad things happening to me and my posts. Far far longer than doing anything about removing the attacks on Cornellier. Put yourself in the position of explaining how my 3 edits meets anything in WP:Disruptive Editting. Or explaining why reporting personal attacks like the ones I did is disruptive in any way shape or form, to the point of requiring immediate and undiscussed blocking. Perhaps have a go at explaining the preventative rationale behind that. Pick out any one of those 3 edits and tell me why a reasonable person would then label me a troll, which as I'm sure you're aware, is a pretty offensive term. As for this idea that there's no rule against calling someone an ignorant idiot or a fucking idiot or saying that you don't know your arse from your elbow, come on. They're some of the most blatant personal attacks as you'll ever see. And there's countless reams of policy that go into great detail about why you really can't accuse others of having called you a liar if they didn't, or of claiming you fabricated stuff when they didn't, or suggest they did something for motives that you don't and then won't substantiate, etc etc etc. I don't have a 'main account' right now, but you've pretty much hit the nail on the head - the tired old 'sock' panacea is what's in play here. Even then, you'll notice the policy it's a little more nuanced than 'if he doesn't look new - block on sight', and believe it or not, there is the basic principle that you not only have to be socking, you have to be doing something bad with it too, before you get blocked. Well, clearly there's been no dialogue here so they have no clue why I am familiar with Wikipedia and have instead gone for option 1. The second inconvenient part of WP:SOCK is pretty much being fudged here with this 'troll' nonsense and the attempted fit-up on the WP:DE charge. If they want to discuss all that though, they can do so after they remove the block. Or I can just create another sock and run this whole mess by people above their pay grades, to see if they see it the way I do - that Wikipedia's admins have somewhere totally got their priorities screwed and that this, probably like many other similar instances, is basically an open and shut case of 'shoot the messenger' if you can't deal with the message, then brush the message under the carpet. == Administrator response times on Wikipedia == * Time taken to notice and remove an instance of one editor calling another editor by name, an ignorant idiot in an edit summary - nobody knows, it hasn't happened yet (the removal; the noticing is being taken care of by dumping it into the memory hole as we speak) * Time taken to misrepresent facts (""hashed out"") about the ANI report on said incident - 5 minutes! Although understandable given that giving an accurate response required reading this whole page * Time taken to shut down the ANI report with a gibberish rationale - 7 mins * Time taken to request an invasion of privacy on filer of ANI report - 16 mins * Time taken to censor reasonable queries about the closure of the ANI report - 2 minutes! * Time taken to block ANI reporter because his entire 3 edit history is disruptive editting (a long term behaviour as the page explains) - 1 hour 42 mins (the delay is not explained by any communication with said editor). The fact that it came 1 minute after me querying the closure of the ANI report, is surely coincidental!. * Time taken to review block of ANI reporter - who knows. A couple of days? == List of administrators involved in this mess == Just for future reference or even historical posterity, should they make any statements in future along the lines of it being futile/pointless/unreasonable/conter-productive to try and stop Mallues from attacking other editors by either advising, negotiating, warning or even blocking him, or otherwise try to

" ==Content removal on ""drug design"" article by Jytdog on October 21, 2014== The description of a structure based selectivity filter discovered by Ariel Fernandez was added today in the ""drug design"" entry and later removed by Jytdog. The work is relevant to structure-based drug design and that is why it was incorporated to the drug design wiki entry. Should the AF articles be quoted instead of his book dealing with structure-based drug design? But I saw books by others quoted in that wiki article as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by :and very clearly this IP address and are the same editor, as the same message was just left here. Absolutely. Nothing to hide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by • == response by ""ariel fernandez"" == MAJOR EDITOR IS NOT ACQUAINTED TO SUBJECT - RESPONSE TO JAMES B WATSON Dear James B Watson and Wikipedia audience, This is Ariel Fernandez. It has been brought to my attention that a sign indicating an alleged connection between a major contributor to this article and myself, the subject, has been posted on my article. This is not correct, I am not aware of any such connection and I must request its immediate removal as it infringes BLP regulations. It is puzzling to me how you have made this inference, but it is simply not correct. I have gone through the list of contributors to my article indicated in its history. I am not personally acquainted with any of them. I don´t know Jydog, James Watson (unless he is the double helix discoverer), Heidi Belkin (Hayde Belinky?) or any other person whose name is indicated in the history. I don´t understand how do you infer such connections or what you are trying to do. I recall having met Heidi way back on a legal matter. While vastly incomplete, the article on me as it now stands seems fair, objective and accurate as far as I can see. It sems to be fairly well documented and seems to have been taken from verifiable sources including websites that I have edited myself. I must ask you to please refrain from publishing such inferences. As far as I know, anybody is free to contribute to wikipedia provided the subject is notable, the info is accurate and well documented and the tone is fair and balanced. Should you have further questions, I would be happy to discuss them. My personal mail is ariel@afinnovation.com Feel free to contact me at your convenience. Ariel Fernandez, Ph. D. — Preceding unsigned comment added by : I think (and please don't take this as authoritative, I did not add the tag) the inference is made from the fact that one of the major contributors is called Arifer, which looks like it might stand for Ariel Fernandez. Also, the pages here and here may be interesting for you to read (I highly recommend reading them). Dear Richard Yin: I have NOT authorize and I don´t know any contributor with that alias. There are people with different vested interests. I simply have no control. All I am saying is that if you state that there is a connection you need to prove it under the standards of the law: Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit. : It seems to me, first of all, that wording like ""appears to have"", ""may require"", etc seems to properly indicate that the tag shouldn't be taken as a statement of fact but as a ""this is what we can tell so far, we might be wrong"". Moreover, the idea that a contributor has a connection with the subject does not necessarily mean that the subject requested, authorized, or knows about the submission. I think

" :::::::::""So long as we summarize the info correctly it will be verifiable"". Read up on Shannon's law and critical theory. I say that because what you seem to be arguing for flies in the face of years and years of social reporting/research in academia.- "

" :And WTF? ""Aryan race is just outdated not factually inaccurate""?!! Are you neonazi or something? That has to be the most insulting condescending bullshit I've ever heard. You might as well just call us the ""little brown people"" while you're at it. After all, it's just a name right? :Has my attempt to correct you on Hexapoda led to you to attempt to do the same to me as well? I'm starting to think I should just revert quietly. Too many people always take it personally.  † "

" *Support. It doesn't take a ""policy"" to tell us that 99% of people will search for him as ""John Buchan"". "

" Though, after consideration, I must say you acted rather poorly in this situation. You ignored a cite for my edit after I directed you to the talk page where I had placed it and, instead, you preferred to chide me, a relatively new user, for an error in citation. You chose to make a knee-jerk reversion without checking the fact under contention. You actually restored incorrectly cited material, and multiple times, too. Further, you blindly conflated one journalist's opinion with, as you put it on my talk page, a ""summar[y] of reputable published opinion."" As the Wikipedia page on genre says, ""in all art forms, genres are vague categories with no fixed boundaries""; as such, any argument about genre must rely on a range of published opinion, not one the words of one (incorrectly sourced) journalist. These are all errors that would be infinitely forgivable if made by ordinary users. That they were made by an admin, someone who assumedly has invested a good deal of time in Wikipedia, speaks poorly for you. "

" :Ah... Where would the world be without entertainment from idiots, eh? ::☭ "

::No, it is not a personal attack, nor is it abusive or obnoxious. It's merely an opinion that it's hard to square Jimbo's decision to accept $500K from an oppressive regime with his other positions and that while he has pledged to donate the money to human rights causes, he apparently hasn't yet done that nor has he identified the organizations to which he's going to give it Jimbo may find all of this quite inconvenient and wish it would go away but he's a public figure, he chose to accept the $500K, it's a legitimate question and it's one that's being asked in the media. NE Ent really hit this on the head: Jimbo is a big boy and I think if he's unhappy and wishes to respond, he can do that himself. Or he may decide to ignore it completely. What I don't think is appropriate is for an admin to start making questionable charges of personal attacks (I remind you that making a false charge is also a personal attack) nor do I find it particularly credible that if admin posts a warning about personal attacks on an user's talk page that it doesn't come with an implicit threat of a block.

My apologies. Instead of having who wrote the song beside the tracks, why not list that below on the personnel?.

" :*Do us all a favour here and stop being so lazy/sloppy! Best. "

This place is full of dickheads like Please delete Frederick Borsch and Lutheran Theological Seminary, Philadelphia. They are not worthy of inclusion in this shit hole. I am very angry about this.

== American Idol (season 11) AfDs == An article you created, Colton Dixon is currently up for deletion. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Idol (season 11) finalists and if you feel the articles should be kept, also expand the articles with reliably sourced information.

Thanks for the message but the citing of reference I am not knowing how to do. As for accuracy of what I added it is from Channel 4 and BBC1 Panorama programmes, and I also know from mu own experience as I am part of that community with 'insider' knowledge.

" * To quote Something Awful :""Haha! Chuck Norris! You see, it's funny because CHUCK NORRIS! Hey, I hear Chuck Norris drove a car into a wall and it exploded but he jumped out at the last second and drop kicked a thug on his way out because he's CHUCK FUCKING NORRIS HAHAHAHA!! Someone hurry up and make a website about Chuck Norris facts because this is never going to get old! NEVER!!!"" "

This message is regarding the page Great Hanshin earthquake. Please stop removing content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. e

::: Firstly, I find the nitpicking ridiculous. Estonia was Nazi-occupied. The Baltics were Nazi-occupied. People who fought in German uniforms for the German army in a Germany-occupied state seem to be collaborators. At least if they fought for the Nazi side of their own free will. :::: That wasn't the point of what I said. In fact, your argument supports mine here. I added the Baltic collaborators to the various national anti-communist categories as these joined the Germans to fight the communists. Martintg and Biophys both removed that, and repeatedly pretended I had done something else. I'm not sure content disputes are best resolved at otherwise unrelated user talk pages.

== Unit-Holders of the First Mortgage Fund (FMF) == On the 25-June-2009, after more than a year of frustration and half-truths, the unit-holders of the FMF took a historic vote and sacked CityPacific as the RE (responsible entity) of the RE. CityPacific has frozen FMF redemptions and monthly distributions of income for more than a year and yet continued to take their fees while they did nothing to serve the best interests of unit-holders. Come May 2009, unit-holders had had enough and throught Balmain/Trilogy, announced a vote for 25-Jun-2009 to sack CityPacific and appoint BalmainTrilogy.

Rubbish. I didn't say British Airforce, I said British Army, and its mentioned expensively in Chapter one.

" ::::Just to be clear, I'm not taking issue with the use of quotes, but you have to make it clear that you are using them as quotes. In other words, you should write ""according to so-and-so"" or something like that, before you present the quote. As written, it looks like fact, as opposed to the opinion of a particular person. Sorry if I wasn't clear about my concern earlier. "

:Thanks for replying there. - Dank

" * DanielKlotz, thank you for your input. It is sincerely appreciated. However, the BOP is on the uploader, not me, you, or anyone else. At most, 1 of the ten has been spoken to, that being ""fair use"" no free one exists. But again, there is a reason why _all_ ten must be addressed. It confounds me that no other editors have spoken to it, but I still hold out with hope. Thank you again for the comment. "

" == Malware Link Removal == *Malicious URL: ( Hex Obfuscation, Obfuscated script ) *https://www.virustotal.com/de/url/a3ffd0182273d8410efc818e74aaa81a3de2c28f5b1ca6b4c1ca64b9b9461220/analysis/1373639624/ *hxxp://www.aysor.am/en/news/2012/05/26/somali-president-elections/ *https://www.virustotal.com/de/url/941d224a6e58e42bd77f82cb2594bd98e08f7df7323c84199302e411bd1def98/analysis/ *http://urlquery.net/report.php?id=3689748 *HTML as an APP = Malicious Intent *https://www.virustotal.com/de/file/74578bfd90d860ce278a00213163da2ff2fa3caeff7472e4b05f1ad9c865eb74/analysis/1373639372/ *http://quttera.com/detailed_report/www.aysor.am *hxxp://www.aysor.am/js/load_js.php?c=23 *https://www.virustotal.com/de/url/7844a57599cffd0713fa31c8a3d9b0cbc116c558fff7bdc3a6e9ebe4af0adb1c/analysis/1373639106/ *http://sitecheck.sucuri.net/results/www.aysor.am *http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/www.aysor.am *A suspicious code was identified loading content from a blacklisted domain: *DOMAIN: *hxxp://ads.adfox.ru/ *https://www.virustotal.com/de/url/119624c049e1752eeef36152079754c2bb6398c62c708216414c3d3c0b853748/analysis/1373639977/ *http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/ads.adfox.ru "

"Obviously you didn't read the entire article or look at its links. I'm not going to continue this silly argument. Your reasoning is based entirely on ""what people look like"" and does not even qualify as original research, the only person you cite is yourself and ""yourself"" only knows out to make baseless and ignorant claims.- | "

so i just reply that he is a sockpuppet himself

== Did hackers uncover Petraeus' saucy affair webmails before FBI? == http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/12/cia_boss_resignation_webmail_intrigue/ :Worth noting?

" :Sorry if I wasn't clear. My concern was that Opus113 might desire credit. That's clearly not an issue, but as it could be in a future instance, there might be a need to consider appropriate policy. "

== Sage Ericksson Page == Hi, why did you delete the Sage Ericksson page i was creating . She is a well known surfer from California.

::Regarding this and another edit summary by you at the same article, I'm not even Indian let alone from Karnataka. Stop with the nonsense, please. -

I can certainly add it, but as the discussion above was essentially about weasel words, I would suggest some slight modification. First of all in his paper Early Anglo Saxons, Welch argues why Ælle could not have landed in the Selsey area, but in his AS England p. 9 he says that the AS Chronicle was a product of the West Saxon court and is concerned with glorifying the royal ancestry of Alfred the Great. Manipulation of royal geneologies , in this and other sources, to enhance the claims of present rulers was common. Literary formulas associated with original myths are a common feature of earlier entries. When Aella and his three sons land from three ships on a beach named after one of the sons, we are reading legend rather then real history. ::::::::::::I think that most historians are lukewarm on Ælle, it is the detail of his existence rather than whether he was a real person. So I would suggest the following, obviously with the appropriate citations: ::::::::::::In the Introduction: ::::::::::::*Delete: The information about him is so limited that it cannot be said with certainty that Ælle existed. ::::::::::::*Change: Ælle and three of his sons are reported to have arrived from the continent near what is now Selsey Bill—the exact location is under the sea, and is probably the shoals currently known as the Owers—and fought against the Britons. :::::::::::::To: According to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle Ælle and three of his sons are said to have landed at a place called Cymensora and fought against the Britons. ::::::::::::*Delete: Although the details of these traditions cannot be verified, evidence from the place names of Sussex does make it clear that it was an area with extensive and early settlement by the Saxons, supporting the idea that this was one of their early conquests. ::::::::::::*Change: Ælle's death is not recorded, and it is not known who succeeded him as king of the South Saxons. :::::::::::::To: Ælle death is not recorded, and although he may have been the founder of a South Saxon dynasty, there is no firm evidence linking him with later South Saxon rulers ::::::::::::The beginning of Historical context section: ::::::::::::*Change: Ælle, if he existed, lived in the middle of the least-documented period in English history of the last two millennia. :::::::::::::To: Historians are divided on the detail of Ælle's life and existance as it was during the least-documented period in English history of the last two millennia. ::::::::::::: Comments??

:: Neither is 'Quadrilogy' but that is still what they call box sets (and has it printed on the box) that feature four films, like Terminator, or Alien.

:Hi Jac16999, thank you for your message ). This is not the first time i have tagged user pages of blocked users with blocked and other similar notices. I have been reverting vandalism, reporting vandals, and tagging them accordingly for many months now. I do it just for everyone's information that the said user has been blocked indefinitely, which can be changed or removed if the user's block has been changed or when the user has been unblocked. I did not find any policy or guideline regarding this, so just doing what i considered to be the right thing. If i have made any mistake or error regarding this or any other issue please do feel free me to point it out, i am always happy to correct any mistakes and learn from other users, and grow positively to help improve the project. Thank you.

== - And you need brain surgery dude!!!!- Stop your crap Mir HArven! You don`t know a shit about Jasenovac!So shut your crappy mouth! ==

* Remove - Gratuitous nudity. It's actually a really horrific swing that that guy is demonstrating, I've got a better cut and am 52 years old and have never played. But you can see his pee-pee, oh goody, Wikipedia is not censored!!! Grrrrrr.

" == Merging with ""Impact of technology on the educational system"" == Hello, Eric. I am picking up a thread you started at Talk:Educational technology# Merging with ""Impact of technology on the educational system"" on 24 April 2012 (UTC). Do I correctly mirror the points you posted by restating things as, ""Educational technology"" properly considered is a domain of ""learning theory"" and is not to be confused with the use of ""hardware and software"" within education? Responding either here or on the said Talk Page will help me confirm my understanding. "

Slyguy is a douchebag

== Interesting result? == I read this interesting tidbit about DNA here. Have you heard of this before? I wonder if there is really something to it?

== Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Secret pages 2 == Because you participated in Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not/Archive 34#Does WP:NOTMYSPACE apply to secret pages?, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Secret pages 2.

You anti-romanian bastard. Bastard! Highschool Putnam will be banned and desysopped though, just like Mikkalai.

" ::I'll give them a go - I'll at least give the bio some attention, because I like those P You are a very hard-working Wikipedian as well ;-) "

" === Options === Prep for RfC. Please feel free to modify the following and add options where you see fit. In the case of a crime, and we are not attributing the crime to a person (in which case we would always use ""allegedly"") when should we use a modifier like ""allegedly"" Example: A) A robbery occurred B) A robbery allegedly occurred # Always use A) until a court of law makes a finding # Use what the RS say # Use what the sources say, however put greater emphasis on the later RS"

Rename, no merge! Its absurd to merge Hindu Terrorism with Hindu Nationalism. Perhaps a rename is required here like Hindutva Terrorism. On a personal front, I would be ashamed if we talk of Hindu Nationalism and Hindu Terrorism in the same breath!

I didn't rate the article but it definitely needs some work. Capitalization issues and a sentence that isn't a complete sentence and appears to have been written by a third-grader. I'll try to find time to work on it.

== Pulizer Prize == The Pulitzer Prize was not issued to only the Edmonton Journal but also to all the other daily and weekly newspapers in the province.

==Good work== I like your images, keep up the good work.

" :My closed captioning reads it as ""nigger"". "

STOP BEING STUPID! WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU? SHE IS NOT 33, SHE IS 39. All the magazines are talking about her marriage to her YOUNGER husband who is 35. SHE IS 39 PEOPLE. You are being ignorant and you suck at math. JAMIE, educate yourself for crying out loud. And by the way, do send a message to her manager and inform her that lying to her fans is a bad thing.

== ATTN BIOTCH == your gay DBZ is not

fuck you, you are a fucking dirt JEWISH ARAB

" == Copyright violation again == Contributor777, I have reverted this edit you made today because it is plagiarized from press copy such as this. Considering your recent and lengthy history with copyright violations, and the subsequent advice given you by Moonriddengirl, I am surprised that you would be copy-pasting text again. Even small infractions of copyright infringement must be taken very seriously. if I discover that you are again violating the Wikipedia policy on use of copyrighted text, you will be blocked from editing. — "

" :::Did someone mention ""soapbox""? I think the plural of lowlife is lowlifes. "

== Your comment == Hello, I just wanted to point out something from your talk page comment. This statement is false for me. No more comments. Thank you,

==Orphan== I happened to find this page by chance. It's very well-written, but there are very few links that come to this page. I've added the WikiProjectLinguistics tag on this page so that hopefully more readership will be able to find it and link other pages to it.

" ::Well, now don't I feel stupid.... · "