User talk:Cush

CUSH'S TALK PAGE

Click here to leave me a note.

Tolkienion Maps

Hey there Cush! I didn't know you were the owner of Tolkienion, I love that site, been going to it since the early days and have been working on getting that #1 spot on your links page for years :) All this talk about maps has got me thinking about uploading my maps I have offline to Tolkien Gateway, I know there are some in there that are yours from Tolkienion and I wanted to ask for permission from you first. Keep up the great work! --Hyarion 17:17, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rohl

I have a question about Rohl's chronology (and yours I think). I see you divided the 20th Dynasty into three parts and overlapped them. It is a very interesting approach. Where can I find evidence for and against such approach? Is there any evidence that would not allow you to do this? Thanks and I'll be looking forward to your answer. AG —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.202.27 (talk) 19:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because there are three distinct lines within the 20th Dynasty (see image). Cush (talk) 17:44, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you take the chart off the Rohl page? Are you amending it? TuckerResearch (talk) 20:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have downloaded the New Chronology (2005).xls from the Yahoo group and I have entered its data into my Local NC manager. Now I have to structure it so I can produce a new overview. I will also have to update my database, which will take quite some effort... Cush (talk) 21:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NC manager

Cush, I am mightily impressed with your NC software. Is there any way you would share this wonderful tool? I have no programming capability and a million dates and names scattered throughout a bunch of notebooks. What do you think of the Lords of Avaris? I haven't read it yet. TuckerResearch (talk) 17:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, do you support the New Chronology as proposed by Rohl? That would be a requirement. And then I'd have to think about giving you access to my database (the software connects to a server).

As for the Lords of Avaris, I am still struggling with the complexity of interconnections that Rohl shows to exist. I am re-reading it at the moment to extract usable dates out of it.

Is there a way to send a personal message on wikiedia?

Cush (talk) 18:38, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, ever since I saw his Pharaoh's and Kings TV special when I was about 16. I have tweaked the years up and down because I have a different Exodus date, but all the synchronisms are the same. I haven't begun Lords of Avaris yet, and my contributions to the Yahoo! Group have been less than sparse since I started work on my PhD, but I am still a Rohlian at heart.

Is the NC manager a standalone piece of software?

I don't know about the personal messaging, if I had to guess I would say no.

TuckerResearch (talk) 23:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The NC manager (which is a .NET application) is not really a standalone software. It requires a database on a (web-)server and a php script that will relay the data (since my provider does not host a .NET framework yet). But if you'd install e.g. xampp on your machine it'll work. I could also write an aspx page to replace the php on a local machine, but that would require IIS to be on your machine (comes with the windows setup). On the other hand I could of course let you use my database, so everything is stored in one place ;-) It would be best if you sent me an e-mail. Just use "E-mail this user" link on my user page.

Cush (talk) 05:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, y'all, I have implemented an offline-version of the NC manager. Who wants it?? Cush (talk) 20:10, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, it works great so far. It is a helpful tool for people making chronologies and working with the New Chronology. TuckerResearch (talk) 04:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No bugs found yet? :-) I think I will implement a few new ways to export data, maybe to Excel or so. Cush (talk) 05:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still enjoying the NC Manager - capital work! I just began reading The Lords of Avaris, it seems there are a million more dates to look into! TuckerResearch (talk) 18:24, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Akhenaten and Palestine

"No he didn't!" (Sorry, getting into kid-talk mode there :). What's your source for saying he did? PiCo (talk) 09:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can track down a book source, but have you ever read the Amarna letters PiCo? TuckerResearch (talk) 23:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC) -- Here: Elwell, Walter (2001). Tyndale Bible Dictionary. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers. p. 409. ISBN 0842370897. - I added the citation to the Exodus page. TuckerResearch (talk) 23:31, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chronology at the Crossroads

Cush,

Do you own a copy of Bernard Newgrosh's Chronology at the Crossroads: The Late Bronze Age in Western Asia? If you don't, I can make a pdf copy of its chapter 18, entitled "A Chronicle of the New Chronology," which give a nice list of events, synchronisms, and dates between 1182 and 870, and post it on the forum.

TuckerResearch (talk) 23:27, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would indeed appreciate it very much, if you could make such a pdf for me. :-) Cush (talk) 01:50, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added the pdf to your History-Book.net New Chronology forum, under Mesopotamian Chronology, in the Assyrian Chronology thread. I hope you find it informative. TuckerResearch (talk) 02:48, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Helpful site

I figured that this could be helpful to you: http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/ TuckerResearch (talk) 20:17, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will look into that. Seems interesting at a first glance. Cush (talk) 22:27, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For your recent reversion at Pi-hahiroth‎. I think we have a recurring problem, have you seen [1]? 17:24, 2 January 2009 (UTC)dougweller (talk)

This is the the same stuff that is edited every now and then into the "Stations list of the Exodus" article. I am not sure there is a need for a Pi-hahiroth article in the first place. Cush (talk) 18:33, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ubaid

Yeh, I updated the Ubaid Period article to include the actual site (archaeology etc) and some misc updates, and coords. Seemed mostly ready to add to COTANE.Ploversegg (talk) 04:46, 15 April 2009 (UTC)ploversegg[reply]

I have adjusted the coordinates somewhat. I suppose this is the right spot?

I used http://www.baghdadmuseum.org/usace/ and entry off http://www.cemml.colostate.edu/cultural/09476/iraq05a.html which were about the same. Ploversegg (talk) 19:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)ploversegg[reply]

The latter of your websites has 30.955608920,46.046645324 for Ubaid. However there is nothing visible at the surface. And it's almost 2 km from the location I gave. So which one is right? Cush (talk) 05:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some links

You might be interested in this site - it's a blog (very academic and respectable) with lots of links to online resources. Haven't found anything in it about biblical chronology yet :) PiCo (talk) 09:06, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which site? Cush (talk) 12:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - [2]. PiCo (talk) 00:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is a lot of religiously motivated material. I do not trust religious people when it comes to archaeological and historical accuracy simply because of their obvious conflict of interests. Especially I do not trust Jews, because people who fabricate deities have no trouble fabricating history as well. Jewish records of the Exodus or of the glorious kings and judges are just not sound. I wouldn't trust or even ask the Vatican or Evangelicals about the historicity of Jesus either... Cush (talk) 16:52, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The site is academic, not religious. "PaleoJudaica.com is an experiment that aims to chronicle and comment on current developments (mainly as recorded in Internet sources) in the academic field of ancient Judaism and its historical and literary context." People with a religious slant would call it atheistic. It's run by Jim Davila, Reader in Early Jewish Studies at St Andrews University, Scotland - quite respectable in terms of his competence to pick what's relevant and interesting in the field. The link I put above is to various sources Davila has found online. His actual blog is here. PiCo (talk) 07:49, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What in the world distinguishes Jews from Christians, Hindus, etc when it comes to 'fabricating' gods? It's just part of human nature in any case. Dougweller (talk) 10:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New Chronology page

Hey Cush. I just wanted to drop by and say that you've acquitted yourself very well in the "battle royal" over the New Chronology (Rohl) page. I particularly like your image, "File:NC Egyptian chronology comparison.png," though I'd like to recommend that you tell us who the "Shaw" of the conventional chronology and what work you got it from. You could put it in the caption or on the image description page. Otherwise, kudos.

TuckerResearch (talk) 02:19, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for the identification of Shaw above. You probably noticed I fixed up the image's page. Also, so you know, I merged David Rohl - geographical theories into the New Chronology (Rohl) article, as I think there was a consensus that the page wasn't notable enough or necessary (see: Talk:David Rohl - geographical theories). TuckerResearch (talk) 03:55, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yahweh

Cush, if I can tear you away from your exchange with Seeker, I really would like your views on what we can do to reduce the amount of space taken up in Yahweh by huge slabs of quotation, and to re-focus that section more on the nature of Yahweh as depicted in the various books. (And frankly, I don't think that discussion with Seeker is ever going to be fruitful). PiCo (talk) 02:13, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In fact I fail to understand what these quotes do to illustrate the character of the biblical deity. There should be descriptive text instead to explain what the quotes imply. Just quoting the bible without giving interpretation by a reliable secondary source is OR and should be tagged with the religious-text-as-primary-source tag. CUSH 02:28, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'd be grateful if you'd put that on the Yahweh talk-page. PiCo (talk) 03:07, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POV Yahweh Vocalization Side-note

Hello Cush. Just replied to your latest reply to me in the Talk:Yahweh page, and I wanted to add a personal side-note to that. I don't think we actually disagree on what I was saying, I may just not be explaining my thought clearly enough. I have generally noted that you and PiCo are — for the most part — on the same page as I am on cleaning up the Y article.

Now that we have finally removed the behemoth sections about the vocalization that use to be in the article, I want to be vigilant about making sure all that does not creep back in. That discussion should, instead, go to the Tetra"n article, and that any discussion about the vocalization that remains within the Y article be kept to a absolute minimum (only present where really necessary, not going into much detail about it) and that it be neutral about that discussion (if people want to know more about it, they can go to the Tetra"n article for it).

That's a basic summary, and I get the feeling that you agree with these thoughts. — al-Shimoni (talk) 10:39, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bible

Regarding this edit, I am reading the sentence you've tagged as unreferenced, and it doesn't seem to make much sense to me, or at the very least it is out of context. In other words, the lack of a reference is not the real problem with this statement. Would you object to having it removed altogether? -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:39, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would rather see who exactly makes the interpretations that the biblical books create a story arc, and on what grounds such interpretation are made. · CUSH · 10:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"most Christian denominations teach that the Bible itself has an overarching message." So they do: they say that the narrative arc begins with the Creation, moves on to God's election of Israel as his Chosen People and to whom he promises the Messiah, that Israel then sins and that God instead sends his son (the Messiah) to the whole world instead of just the Jews. This is pretty basic to Christian theology, surely? (You don't have to believe it, just note it in the article). PiCo (talk) 02:33, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know that. However, there are warring interpretations of such an arc, especially between Judaism and Christianity. So it is of importance who claims what and on what grounds. And not just vaguely, but who exactly claims what and based on what biblical passages. · CUSH · 06:30, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and "Grüeß di!"

I've found you as a new user in the Bavarian (Boarisch) Wikipedia. Do you have special interests there? Having been landed here, I see that you consider yourself non-religious, what's your good right; but moreover you think that the world would be better without any religion. Also your good right - but don't you presume that this might influence your editing negatively? For instance, I am a Catholic; but see just my article on Miguel Torga, that agnostic Portuguese poet and writer (if you have any Bavarian, of course ;-) ). Hellsepp 10:08, 3 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellsepp (talk • contribs)

Pi-Rameses, where it is

On Crossing of the Red Sea (or whatever it's called), you were called out for making a correction on this point (this is your comment from the talk page): "The academic consensus about the location of biblical Ramses is Pi-Ramesses. That is not in the Wadi Tumilat." But you were right. I misinterpreted the source. My apologies, and I hope I now fixed it correctly. (By the way, it wasn't me who called you out on your correction, but I feel responsible since it was my error that was being defended so mistakenly).PiCo (talk) 09:57, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Find more ancient locations at my ancientlocations.net.

Oh, it was user Weaponbb7 who likes to revert me everywhere he can just because he hates me for not following his religionist points of view. But he is only a poor uneducated bully. ≡ CUSH ≡ 10:07, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to say whatever it is my source (Tommy Thompson) is saying. If I've misinterpreted, please correct. But you'll need a source, Thompson or someone else. PiCo (talk) 11:22, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yahweh

The lead has now headed off into la-la-land. The article is not worth editing. PiCo (talk) 03:23, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this was bound to happen. The lead should be 5 or 6 lines at most, and yet comprehensively sum up the subject matter. There should be no collection of evidence for any particular position in the lead. ≡ CUSH ≡ 04:48, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gollum

Please feel free to contribute to discussion at this talk page regarding etymology of names in Middle-earth articles. Carl Sixsmith (talk) 11:36, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seeeker is at ANI

I took it to WP:ANI#User:Seeker02421 disruption at Yahweh earlier today. The Resident Anthropologist (Talk / contribs) 18:40, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, at ANI I read that warnings are proposed. However, this issue has been going on for at least two full years now. Seeker02421 comes up with his rubbish every few months, then he gets warned and sometimes banned for a few days. But he always comes back. I have conducted lengthy discussions with him (and with his previous account) but even after all this time the point of his argument still escaped me. His position seems to be that the identification of the biblical god depends on the usage of the "right" spelling. He seems to claim that if the name is different then another deity is meant.

I think permanent ban would be the right procedure (there have been numerous "final" warnings already), but of course I am not an admin to suggest thus at ANI. ♆ CUSH ♆ 19:20, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cush you dont have to be an admin at to give opinions at ANI The Resident Anthropologist (Talk / contribs) 21:35, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh? Very good... :-) ♆ CUSH ♆ 22:07, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cush you indicate a second account... This account has been registered awhile could you expand on this? The Resident Anthropologist (Talk / contribs) 22:47, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I checked and I must admit I had this confused. ♆ CUSH ♆ 23:38, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well he is blocked until he agrees to play by our rules.... if he agrees the next infraction is probably a perma-block. The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 20:43, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And Seeker is back on Wiki confused to why (s)he has been blocked Blocked The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 20:51, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See, that's the other thing about Seeker: his edits always render a talk page illegible because he just can't use wiki syntax right. Personally I am through with the issue. I have no intention to go into discussions with Seeker any more because I have already wasted too much time to try to get some logic and some education into him. I only hope he leaves the Tetragrammaton article and related articles alone. ♆ CUSH ♆ 21:35, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NPOVN where I've raised the Indus Valley edits

Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 11:34, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion spree

Perhaps too much sugar in the cornflakes? PiCo (talk) 09:41, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What the heck are you doing? You'll get reverted anyways. Maybe deleting huge parts of articles isn't the most subtle way to remove dubious content. Especially when you seem to be rather coarse with your deletions.

I do support your deletion of the biblical quotes section from the Yahweh article. ♆ CUSH ♆ 09:48, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking of you when I did it :) PiCo (talk) 09:50, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How so? ♆ CUSH ♆ 09:56, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I mean I thought you'd approve. Wikipedia doesn't need editing, it needs clear-felling. PiCo (talk) 10:17, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We've been at the same point already in December of 2009... ♆ CUSH ♆ 10:23, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes. Well, I've made the Big Delete, and we'll see what happens. Seeker seems to have retired, but Corinne is still around. PiCo (talk) 10:32, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have not yet encountered Corinne. ♆ CUSH ♆ 10:42, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Might be thinking the wrong nick. But there's one editor who's intent on keeping the anthology.PiCo (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, now I know... ♆ CUSH ♆ 06:41, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Usage of G-d

Hi Cush, In the Tetragrammaton article in an edit summary you asked, "Substitution of HaShem or Adonai: can we get a source for the usage of "G-d" ?" - which questioned the word "some" in the article. I'm not sure there is a definitive source. There is a lot of variety in usage. For WP editors that have scruples about typing the word "God", there is a Template:G-d which may be either transcluded or substituted, which allows them to type "G-d" or "g-d", and "God" (always capitalized) appears in the article. (People who prefer not to capitalize the word "God" may use that template also. :)
There is a WP article subsection on G-d which you might look at too. See the Shaimos reference link there. I don't have a clue what "Shaimos" is all about.
HTH (Hope This Helps. :) —Telpardec (talk) 20:12, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness me! I just read through the discussion about the G-d template. If I were compassionate I'd feel sorry for those ultraobservant Jews who think their god so small-minded...

Anyways, I would be interested in actual numbers of who really uses g-d instead of god. ♆ CUSH ♆ 21:09, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, whatever the number, it increased by plus two since we both used it too in these messages. Google for "G-d" was not very helpful, with most of the results being the two letters "GD", abbreviations for things like General Dynamics, Grateful Dead, even a "G-d Damn" in the mix. There were a couple of fairly well written pages explaining the term:
Judaism 101 The Name of G-d
Why Do Jews Write "G-d" instead of "God"? (wisegeek.com)
Other letters besides the hyphen are occasionally used, like the apostrophe, which is actually a valid substitute for the letter "o", in words like isn't, meaning "is not".
HTH (Hope This Helps. :) —Telpardec TALK 08:36, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This practice always struck me as weird. Do Jews really think their deity not smart or lenient enough to know when God is abused ? And btw, since God is not a name, how does using the word infinge on Exodus 20:7? The deity's name is YHWH and it is transcribed in bible translations as LORD. So maybe Jews would write L-rd, but writing G-d is just nonsensical. ♆ CUSH ♆ 09:23, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

name-calling Jew

Knock it off, Cush. That post is unacceptable. Dougweller (talk) 08:49, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa called me and another editor assholes. Because we were against her fundamentalist views expressed in articles. Remember? I am done talking to that woman. Lisa is the only editor I truly dislike and I cannot AGF in her case, because I have known her for far too long to be so naive. ♆ CUSH ♆

Sounds as though you've both been out of line - where did she do that? I note she's called you a Rohl Fanboy so I might have a word with her about that. Dougweller (talk) 10:35, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know. A year ago or so. She got blocked a couple of days for it. But her attitude has never changed. She is always the same Lisa Liel. ♆ CUSH ♆ 10:59, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok, she should have been blocked, glad she was. Dougweller (talk) 12:45, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, by now I am used to religionist editors who come and go. Only Lisa remains, but I am used to her manipulations as well. And to her personal attacks, however veiled they may be... ;-) ♆ CUSH ♆ 13:28, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The insults occurred here . ♆ CUSH ♆ 21:57, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'Overwhelming'

See [3] and find page 31 (search for 'highlands'). Nothing there justifies overwhelming, the word should never have been there, it's an editor's interpretation. I'd remove it if it was about biblical evidence with the same wording in the source, so it should be removed here. Dougweller (talk) 19:35, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK. You are right in saying that "overwhelmingly" is wrong. "only" would be more appropriate. The archaeological evidence points to an Israelite community arising peacefully and internally in the highlands of Canaan. That's right. Exclusively. There is no archaeological evidence for the biblical story. None. You win. ♆ CUSH ♆ 19:51, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Bag end color2.jpeg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bag end color2.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:43, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The drawing without color is originally copyrighted by David Wyatt. I did the colorization (with the permission from David Wyatt) in 2003 for my now defunct website Tolkienion.com .

I don't know what license to assign to this. ♆ CUSH ♆ 00:58, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cush. You have new messages at Talk:Philadelphia (film).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jesus Christ

Do you care about this discussion, which involves an edit that in part at least concerns an issue you raised? If you are fine with the recent edit I won't keep arguing my point. Slrubenstein | Talk 18:52, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your graphic

I just saw your graphic - I took the liberty of uploading it to Jews. Oncenawhile (talk) 22:04, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why? ♆ CUSH ♆ 22:19, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because it clears up a point that many are confused about. Oncenawhile (talk) 08:44, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's already been removed. That was predictable. Jews on Wikipedia is a story of its own. ♆ CUSH ♆ 09:22, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Reason

I do not have an account to be used on here. I just wanted an answer from my previous question posted on here last week. Just because I am another IP address on here doesn't mean I'm not an actual person. I am just frustrated with the negative feedback on Israel you have given here, that is all.75.171.8.89 (talk) 22:51, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And IPs are people too. Right? ~Adjwilley (talk) 23:04, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an article talk-page. There is no subject matter to discuss here and no consensus to build. And I have no obligation to respond to anyone on my talk-page. Especially not to somebody who seems to be only on WP to instigate. I have read the "contributions" of this IP and his/her previous IPs. But honestly, I am too lazy for tracking a changing IP's activities. ♆ CUSH ♆ 23:26, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of discussion which might be of interest to you

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 18:05, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Topic ban

This is to notify you that following a discussion at AN/I, a topic ban has been imposed on your editing, for a period of six months, starting 23:21, 20 July 2012 (UTC), from the subjects of Jesus of Nazareth, the history of Christianity, and the history of Judaism, broadly construed, in all namespaces (except in appealing this topic ban). Violations of this topic ban can lead to the topic ban being extended to an indefinite topic ban and/or blocks. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:24, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that was to be expected. Religious POV has become dominant on WP while asking for reliable sources that feature evidence has become contemptible.

I will, however, continue to edit articles about ancient history. And if religious editors introduce anything out of their religions' doctrine as historical fact, I will remove it. ♆ CUSH ♆ 10:14, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, you most certainly will not. It seems you are here to push your agenda. --98.87.95.109 (talk) 21:46, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am here to ascertain that only statements are made in this encyclopedia for which evidence can be properly cited. And evidence just cannot be replaced with somebody's authority. A statement about history has merit because of the evidence provided and not because of who makes the statement. Speculation, even if it done by "respected" historians, is still speculation. The ban was imposed (in my absence) because I reject any statements made about the historical Jesus by historians without substantiating them by proper citations from writings that predate the writings of Paul. But of course there are no sources mentioning any Jesus prior to Paul. All historians ever cite are writings by people who wrote about Jesus when Christianity already existed as a religious grouping.

Religious doctrine has no place in determining actual history. History is a real science, not a playground for religionists. They have pushed their agenda in the world and here on wikipedia long enough already. Wikipedia exists to educate, not to proselytize ♆ CUSH ♆ 23:54, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

picture of fountain on Loreley

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lorelei#picture_of_fountain -- comments solicited! cheers, Doceddi (talk) 14:33, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mormons

On Talk:Jesus you left a comment "LDS is fringe and Mormon views need not be included. The Book of Mormon, being the work of a well-known con man, has no status as any kind of reliable source anyways.".

I wholly agree with your comment about the Book of Mormon not meeting WP:RS for anything other than citing its own contents.

Also, I personally have read the book of Mormon and I did not find it at all meaningful or worthwhile to read, not as a historical text, not as a holy text, not as fiction. And there's a lot I disagree with about the beliefs and practices of LDS. But there's also a lot I respect and admire about them. Like any religion, they're a big mix of good and bad things.

I would like to point out Wikipedia:Civility, however, point 1b, because your comment "being the work of a well-known con man" seems to be a personal attack aimed at the author of the book, who is seen as a central figure in the Mormon religion. I think this comment could come across as disrespectful or offensive to Mormons. I want to fully include Mormons (and anyone) in Wikipedia, so long as they follow guidelines and policy. I think it's more constructive to focus on the basic matter at hand, which I think there is a clear consensus on, which is that the book of Mormon does not meet the RS guidelines as a historical source. Cazort (talk) 14:07, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lorelei

Your recent edit scrubbing instances of "Lorelei" from Loreley was overzealous; please see my comments on Talk:Loreley#Instances_of_Lorelei_.28with_an_.22i.22.29 and reply there if you are so inclined. -- Limulus (talk) 09:33, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Design stuff

How did you get such a cool user page (with the side bar ect) and the 'Cush' logo thingy? --Grammarbishop8 (talk) 11:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia allows certain HTML elements. That's all. ♆ CUSH ♆ 18:46, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thankyou.:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grammarbishop8 (talk • contribs) 11:13, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Punt?

Hi, I notice that you were the contributor of the image of the hieroglyphic representation of the name Punt (or p-wn-n-t). I don't suppose you might have any insights into the etymology of this name, or whether it was purely an exonym applied by the Ancient Egyptians or derived from an endonym of the Puntians themselves? Rìběnrén (talk) 01:23, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Götterdämmerung

Hi, I saw you reverted my edit to Götterdämmerung regarding usage of the term to refer to the fall of the Third Reich. Though I suppose you're right to remove the unsourced statement, I do think it's accurate, so what would be considered adequate sourcing for such a statement? I can find plenty of examples of use of the term in this way, but it's more difficult to find a source that explicitly makes the link, at least from a quick search. Knight of Truth (talk) 23:17, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I find it tiresome that people try to tie everything about Wagner to the Nazis. Personally, I have come across "Götterdämmerung" as a description of something ending badly, especially the downfall of presumptuous and arrogant people, but not in any Nazi context. So go find a reliable source. ♆ CUSH ♆ 18:55, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for fixing File:Standard Model of Elementary Particles.svg so fast. And for creating such a pretty illustration in the first place. I like the touch with the circles particularly, even if you do kinda already have to know what it's supposed to be illustrating to appreciate that part. Laura Scudder | talk 19:17, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I still have problems with using such fonts that will be rendered correctly to PNG by the RSVG tool. ♆ CUSH ♆ 19:46, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Land of Punt map

Hi there Cush

I am researching a book that may delve heavily into pre-historical / ancient African civilisations based in or near Somalia. Having come across multiple sources referring to the mythical Land of Punt as being in Somalia, I was wondering where you got this map from and what sources were used to create it?

I have read that the idea of Punt being as far east as Somalia has been refuted by sources showing that a land army of 20,000 came from Punt with other tribes from the Libyan / Ethiopian area. (Kitchen - the Elusive Land of Punt.) Is your map based on more up-to-date information?

As an expert in the realm of ancient maps, perhaps you can also point me in the direction of any other ancient Somalian civilisations on the periphery of modern academic study (but alive in a myth / story / ancient imagination...?)

Many thanks for any help you can offer in advance, and for uploading source material in the first place.

Carmenta — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carmenta14 (talk • contribs) 12:19, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I had made that map quite a long time ago, even before uploading it to Wikipedia. It must have been around 2004. At the time I used numerous sources (but not Kitchen), which unfortunately are no longer available to me. ♆ CUSH ♆ 19:36, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

East/West, South/ South-West/ Southnorthern.... European Jews

Hello, my name is Marina and I like cleaning Wikipedia. Would you like to help me in moving 4 articles into one. I mean article like that one: List of West European Jews to an article liek List of European Jews (by country). I saw your commoent on the discussion page and I thought I should ask.--Martina Moreau (talk) 20:01, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request to use Picture

Hi Cush -- I have written a book that you would probably like Virtual Earth Graduate which will appear on Amazon in a couple of weeks... it is an expose of what Earth really is, examining Religion (largely false), History (largely false), and Science (has some errors), and it is not a religious book... I could be called a Gnostic. I am part Celtic, part Norse and while I was researching the Tree of Life, and looking for more info on the nine levels (in the jpeg I am referring to) I came across your beautiful representation of the 9 levels... which surprised me and looks a lot like the Sefirot (jewish Kaballah) -- of course there is merely the resemblance and the two are not the same thing... I am very interested to share something about Runes and Norse mythology (cosmology) in my next book, tentatively called Virtual Earth Esoterica and your jpeg would do nicely as well as the woodcut (by Adam McLean) called The Gnostic Seeker ... I prefer yours.

It looks like your jpeg is Common (Open/free) use as long as the author/artist is given credit. I'm checking to see if this is true.

I saw your list of personal data down the right side of your website/screen... I too was a computer programmer for 30+ years (Now retired) and I wrote many languages -- C# was not one, but C and C++, Assembler, PICK and Foxpro were among those we used for years.

My goal in the new book is to explore Man's real nature and explain the Norse Cosmology, compare it to metaphysical aspects of Sefirot, kundalini, Serpent Wisdom (started in the fist book)and Gnosticism, as well as examine the INterlife more, how lifeScripts and karma work... that kind of thing... I would give credit in the text and inside the front cover to the jpeg and any quoted material from your website (or whatever this is I am typing my message into)...

Looking forward to hearing from you, thanks

Jay Hegland

You mean the image "Nine Worlds of Norse Religion", yes?

It is an adaption of https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fil:Norse_Nine_Worlds.jpg

You can use this if you wish. What resolution would you need? The original image is 6400 x 6400 pixels.

♆ CUSH ♆ 19:29, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Near East

Hi Cush, I added the link to the United Monarchy back to the ANE page, but added 'traditional date of...' as well. I don't think simply deleting it is very helpful, as it is still debatable and is accepted in some quarters (more widely amongst religious groups than archaeologists), so not including a link to it is probably confusing. Hopefully adding 'traditional date' is suitably NPOV and indicates that this isn't accepted by everyone? Thanks. GPRutter (talk) 14:45, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The United Monarchy is ahistorical. Saul, Ishbaal, David, Solomon only exist inside the Bible. There is no archaeological or historical basis for the period whatsoever. "Traditional" is unscientific, religious POV. ♆ CUSH ♆ 15:01, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree (which is neither here nor there obviously - original research and all that). More to the point, Holladay (1995) The Kingdoms of Israel and Judah in Levy's The archaeology of society in the Holy Land talks about "the United Monarchy (David-Solomon, ca. 1000-930 BCE)" p380; Kuhrt (1995) The Ancient Near East discusses the general lack of evidence: "there are no royal inscriptions from the time of the United Monarchy (indeed very little written material altogether), and not a single contemporary reference to either David or Solomon ... Against this must be set the evidence for substantial development and growth at several sites, which is plausibly related to the tenth century." p438; and Kitchen in On the reliability of the Old Testament (2003) spends a whole chapter on the question before concluding "the physical archaeology of tenth-century Canaan is consistent with the former existence of a unified state on its terrain" p158.

In other words, I don't think you can write it off quite so easily. Totally accept that it is a minority view (and those sources are rather out of date), but there are nonetheless scholars who would disagree with you that there is no archaeological or historical basis. I was at a lecture at the British Museum a couple of weeks ago given by Dr Routledge of Liverpool who said that he thought that the tradition of the House of David (dating to the 10th century) wasn't a problem, but the real question was 'what was it?'.

I'm not sold on 'traditional date of...', so if you've got a better way of describing it, please go for it.

Hope that helps. GPRutter (talk) 15:54, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your Design

Hey there Cush, just want to say your union flag is pretty awesome! Really you should push it forward in the event of Scotland leaving the UK.

I am afraid they will not ask me :-) ♆ CUSH ♆

The Nine Worlds Image Usage

Hi Cush

We are small independent media and publishing company specializing in ancient religions. We are producing a program on Asatru and in this regard are utilizing a picture called "The Nine Worlds" as it appears that this is in Wikipedia common domain. Please let us know if this is not. The file's url is as follows: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norse_cosmology#mediaviewer/File:Nine_Worlds_of_Norse_Religion.jpg

Best Regards Syam Editor Mythology Corner www.mythologycorner.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.171.199.146 (talk) 23:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please see answer above ♆ CUSH ♆

Thor

I think we are very interested in the same things Would love to hear from you God bless and have a merry Christmas Gatesofheaven4 (talk) 09:36, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

?? ♆ CUSH ♆ 20:24, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

ancient history
Thank you, user interested in ancient history, for adding images of hieroglyphic signs, for a New Chronology Dates for Ancient Egypt, for requesting sources and fighting trivia, for your belief in infoboxes, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:42, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1076 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:21, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Five years ago, you were recipient no. 1076 of Precious --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:11, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient sites in near east map - large body of water

Hello Cush, I saw your map in an article about ancient sites of the near east and I'm not sure the large body of water displayed actually exists. If it did in ancient time, it's the first I've herd of it and therefore fascinating. For now, I've taken it down.

Thanks.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0f/NC_Iran_sites.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by FlandersClaret (talk • contribs) 13:58, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like the relevant info. I didn't know about to either and it is indeed fascinating! Seems to be a thoroughly unpleasant-sounding salt marsh today though. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 15 Adar 5775 14:17, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The modern region of Dasht-e Kavir is the dried-up floor of ancient lakes that existed well into the 3rd millennium BCE. I am of course sad that you had to take down the map. ♆ CUSH ♆ 18:55, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense, it's a lovely map. Let's just find some sources for it, give it a wee mention in the clarion, and maybe expand on that section of the desert's article. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 15 Adar 5775 19:27, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The map needs an update anyways. And as it is the first that FlandersClaret "herd", I cannot possibly leave it as it is.♆ CUSH ♆ 06:24, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

regarding that ban you wanted

I'm asking that since you want to ban 87.244.24.96, what grounds are we banning him on. I know, he's stubborn, and consensus is against him and shows many signs of being a potential tendentious editor, but the article in question is semi-protected, so he can't edit what he wants. At the risk of seeming to agree with him, (which I don't) I'm going to say that I don't think there's enough disruption here to block him outright, especially given that he has some familiarity with policy. Discuss-Dubious (t/c) 18:26, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the user's contribs and talk. 87.244.94.46 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). The user is not potentially tendentious - the user is a blatant Single Purpose POV Pusher with signs of WP:NOTHERE - frequently engaging in edit warring to push pro-ISIL sources, and only on that topic. -- Aronzak (talk) 19:06, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see the problem. Note this edit war, this edit war, this one, his contentiousness, and the fact that every edit outside of Eastern Lightning shows clear POV push. Discuss-Dubious (t/c) 21:00, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can the IP perhaps be traced to somewhere in the vicinity of the ISIS area? ♆ CUSH ♆ 20:19, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I checked, he's from Jersey. Discuss-Dubious (t/c) 21:00, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I checked and WhatIsMyIP found Moscow for 87.244.24.96 via IP2Location and IPAddressLabs. ♆ CUSH ♆ 21:29, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure we're on the right side of dox-land anymore, but I used his contribs page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Discuss-Dubious (talk • contribs) 00:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

I appreciate your intervention about the uncivil erase of a few of my contributions to wikipedia. The articles were erased because of PERSONAL VENDETTA, without regard of Wikipedia. Most of the article you name are sections from other wiki articles, written by others....but the Mafioso Vito (nicknamed "traitor of his own people" by a person who knows him personally) only erases and erases and erases with his hate. Unfortunately Wikipedia has no control on such a low level admin! (he never allows a defense of what I write: I could add a lot of data, for example, about what he erases...). Anyway for your further information please go to [4] and click on Manmer2015 ....so you'll understand more about who really is this "deletionist" damaging Wikipedia. Sincerely, B. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.144.249 (talk) 12:39, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Go away. Your ban is justified. ♆ CUSH ♆ 15:50, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WOW. What an aggressive answer! After 183 messages sent to wikipedians about this "matter", you are the only answering in such a way (see for example this)....OK, no problem: I understand you, but I hope you'll understand me....I have written more than 100,000 posts on Wikipedia in 8 years after my "ban", that was based on complete lack of justice (only if you are hurt like me, you'll behave the way I did: a vandal will abandon Wikipedia soon or later as all of them do, don't you agree?). Anyway, I wish you the best in your life....BD

PS: A lot of sections of what I wrote on "Christian Berbers", was transferred from other articles like Early African Church, Muslim conquest of the Maghreb, etc...but no one has complained about these articles, while User:Berean Hunter with malignity (like Tokyogirl) found that "..In short, verifiability would be a nightmare.." on my article erased by the Mafioso Vituzzu. BTW: I hope you'll never find in your life a Mafioso...in that case you'll understand what I mean!

What makes you think I would be interested in your whining? I am interested in having a list of Roman sites in Northwest-Africa, i.e. I am interested in the subject matter. That is all. Neither Christians nor Berbers interest me. Now leave my talk page alone. ♆ CUSH ♆ 08:01, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some baklava for you!

Are you on? Allygggggg (talk) 16:55, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:NC Egypt Levant sites.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:NC Egypt Levant sites.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:43, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Voyage of cush.gif

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Voyage of cush.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Nick⁠—⁠^Contact/_Contribs 23:35, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please avoid changing "Trump" to "Drumpf"

Hi Cush. In one of your recent edits, you changed the word "Trump" to "Drumpf". I assume that this was unintentional and caused by having the Drumpfinator extension enabled. To avoid this kind of mistake in the future, please disable the extension before editing articles that mention Trump. Thank you. —Granger (talk · contribs) 20:28, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the hint. I had not noticed that Drumpfinator also changes the content of inputboxes and textareas. ♆ CUSH ♆

Oxytocin, Ethnocentrism and Tribalism

Ethnocentrism and Tribalism are connected through the functionality of the Oxytocin molecule yet the articles remain completely unattached. This bothers me yet I remain a mostly retired editor and, being sick of the editing conflicts and a bit inept at the politics, will defer to you since you at one time had an interest in the Ethnocentrism article. 97.85.173.38 (talk) 20:51, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

?? ♆ CUSH ♆ 02:05, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Neither Tribe nor Tribalism articles make mention of oxytocin as a tribal bonding/building mechanism yet Ethnocentrism does.

“This is the best evidence yet that oxytocin is not the ‘moral molecule,’” said Carsten de Dreu from the University of Amsterdam, who co-led the study, which was published today (March 31) in PNAS. “It doesn’t make people more moral or immoral. It shifts people’s focus from themselves to their group or tribe.”. There's some other source(s) on Springer but the ongoing DDoS attacks seems to be effecting it.

I'm not up for a fight to make these changes so I'm pointing them out to you who showed interest in the Ethnocentrism article some years back. Is that any more clear? 97.85.173.38 (talk) 11:05, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you get near a point, make it. Otherwise stop trolling me. ♆ CUSH ♆ 08:16, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How is this trolling? Trolling would be some negative comments, snide remarks or vindictiveness towards you and I have shown nothing but WP:Faith in my comments to you. Maybe I'm missing some interpretation of my words that make them seem like a hostile act towards you. I assure you this is an attempt to improve the articles and no other emotional content should be discerned except where indicating my frustration at my inept social skills when working on Wikipedia. I'm asking you to make source supported changes to Wikipedia because anon's are outsiders and can't get effective work done. I do not have the will to get these changes done; maybe you can. 97.85.173.38 (talk) 04:51, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why you cannot make that change is that is would constitute WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. Oxytocin has no impact on ethnocentrism or tribalism, nor does it cause those. The article you linked is dubious at best. ♆ CUSH ♆ 14:07, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:CURLY/MOS:STRAIGHT

Can you please clarify for me why you said MOS:CURLY (and, even more, MOS:STRAIGHT) aren't relevant here? The previous edit seems to have gone directly against MOS:STRAIGHT. Nitpicking polish (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't the edit only insert non-breaking spaces ( ) ? ♆ CUSH ♆

It also made a bunch of straight single and double quotes curly, including in areas of text untouched by the  -insertion; hence my confusion about your comment when reverting. Nitpicking polish (talk) 00:45, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Use of your svg Standard Model file

Hi,

If I am reading correctly, your svg file for the beautiful picture of the Standard Model is attribution limited although all the other versions are public domain. I want to add text (e.g., column headers) to it and use it in my books and web and elsewhere. However, I am concerned about being able to do a full attribution in all those places. Would you consider granting me full public-domain rights to use it if I include a small-text line at the bottom of the image citing you and Wikipedia as the source?

As I rarely log into Wikipedia for editing, please email me at (private mail) to let me know your response.

Thanks much for considering this, Martha Lindeman, Ph.D. MJLnew2010 (talk) 03:46, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I will reply to you via your suggested mail address. ♆ CUSH ♆ 09:32, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apostles

"STOP making stuff up." What are you writing about?!? My only mistake is that I didn't put reference. But on Greek transliteration there's no reference neither. Stuff are not made up. They are from Aramaic Bible in Plain English Matthew 10:1-4, Mark 3:13-19, Luke 6:12-16, John 13:24-26, John 20:24 & John 21:2. Please undo the changes. Thank you. Gsom7 (talk) 13:01, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See Article Talk Page. ♆ CUSH ♆ 21:14, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

176.74.56.0/21

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Cush (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Caught by a web host block. I am in a hotel in Wiesbaden, Germany and Wikipedia tells me I cannot edit a page because User:NinjaRobotPirate has blocked 176.74.56.0/21. I cannot even write on that admin's talk page. I am a registered user whose edits can be easily tracked. What does it matter what IP I use? ♆ CUSH ♆ 19:55, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Seems resolved. User is editing again. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:40, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I unblocked the range. Try now. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:03, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To answer the original question: Web hosts (such as the one your Wiesbaden hotel apparently uses) are considered a form of anonymizing proxy and are particularly susceptible to abuse. Thus they may be blocked on sight. One of the possible problems is that they may make it significantly harder to technically confirm sockpuppetry, so it does matter whether a registered account uses such a webhost. For editors in good standing IP block exemption, which permits editing through such blocks, is an option; personally I'd have thought granting that temporarily would have resolved the problem just as well as lifting the IP block. Huon (talk) 00:00, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand why known editors are subject to IP blocks in the first place, especially when an editor's real-life identity is known. Should handling via IP addresses not be used only for unregistered editors? ♆ CUSH ♆ 15:30, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There's a difference between "registered editors" and "editors whose real-life identity is known", and that difference isn't one that easily allows us to treat the latter differently than any other of the former. I don't want to go into WP:BEANS territory, but I can easily think of ways to abuse an anonymizing proxy that is open to edits by registered users. Huon (talk) 23:25, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

176.74.56.0/21 again

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Cush (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Caught by a web host block by User:SQL. Why am I targeted again? This block clearly does not exist because the IP is considered dangerous, as the block has an expiration date and the IP is already known (see post above). ♆ CUSH ♆ 17:38, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

See below (Edit conflict) SQL ^{Query me!} 17:45, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's because syseleven's website focuses on cloud hosting / webhosting. There is a small, non-obvious part hidden away in german that mentions high-speed FTTH internet access in Berlin. SQL ^{Query me!} 17:44, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Have you just admitted that I have been singled out? What other editing attempts have been made from the IP at hand since my original block in February? ♆ CUSH ♆ 17:57, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Syseleven is a webhost, primarily. We block webhosts from editing for reasons that were explained clearly to you by Huon above. It isn't a difficult concept that I might not have seen the obscure menu item in german that briefly mentioned ftth. Please remember that Assume good faith is a core behavioral guideline on this project. SQL ^{Query me!} 18:00, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, I'm not a checkuser - I can't see what accounts are using what ranges, and I had no idea you even existed until today. So no, I was not singling you out. SQL ^{Query me!} 18:01, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I Love You Already!

After viewing your intellectual tastes and programming language tastes (mainly php I tend to avoid Microsoft products) I'm sure we would be best of friends IRL. I love hitch and his hitch slaps, I have God Is Not Great on audiobook which I listen too a lot, I binge out on hitch slaps for my entertainment, and I love telling people the truth about the "vile Albanian dwarf" as hitch originally called her Mofo Teresa. I am also a fan and the wonders of Science and the talks of Dr Richard Dawkins and evolutionary biology, I find the evolutionary proximity of chordates to echinoderms absolutely fascinating. I also love ancient Kush/Nubia and Egyptology and the ancient Greeks, 0 a.d. Recently added the Nubians to their campaign and from what I saw from the screenshots they look pretty good. I wonder if there is campaign where you can invade punt and steal their myrrh! I like your retro rendering of the punt landscape did you do it in pov-ray? I also love Lord of the Rings, I can do a very good impression of Gollum, I think the Tolkien estate was wrong to try and censor your maps they are obviously doing the work of Sauron in wanting to control all information about Arda and Middle Earth, I loved looking at LOTR maps when I was a kid! Happy Hacking, and don't stop reading Hitch! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.2.64.3 (talk) 21:53, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What? <cush/> ♆ CUSH ♆ 01:05, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BMK

Helo do you mind havling a little chat with this guy please? He just tried shutting down our discussion about the term Caucasian saying, not a forum and that I was being racist. A little help please? What, is it because I said that many North Americans are naive for calling the white race "Caucasian", because it lumps in all Europeans in with people who have nothing to do with them outside of sharing a continent with them (assuming you draw Europe's boarder at the Caspian sea). 23.151.192.180 (talk) 16:51, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also headsup, he reverted your global template with the revert summary of B.S. 23.151.192.180 (talk) 16:55, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Mythology mark at the pages of Gods and Goddesses of Antiquity

Salve! I saw you tried to discuss the matter of a Mythology mark at the pages of Gods and Goddesses of Antiquity. Saying that Jupiter is Mythology and Jesus is not - unfair and biased. I think it is inappropriate and must be changed. I am an absolute noobie in Wiki so can you please help in explaining how this task can be approached? Hope you will see this message soon and answer. For any case - my contacts: m.octavius.corvus@gmail.com or https://www.facebook.com/mcorvus

Vale! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcus Octavius (talk • contribs) 08:59, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pharaohs in the Bible

Hey Cush,

This is about the change to the wording from "legends" to "narrative" in the opening paragraph (and your reversion) of "Pharaohs in the Bible". My reasoning to changing it was that "legends" only refers to fictitious accounts, whereas "narrative" can refer to either real or fabricated stories. Being that we can neither prove nor disprove the relation of pharaohs mentioned in the Bible and those historically confirmed, using a more neutral term satisfies the controversy.

Furthermore, the word "narrative" already appears 3 times in the article.

If I have misunderstood you, please feel free to continue this discussion.

Regards, Leno405 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leno405 (talk • contribs) 16:02, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have spent 25 years discussing the issue in many WP articles and in real life. The Tanach/Bible is mythology. Everything the Bible assigns to before the Divided Monarchy period is fictional. There was no Solomon, no David, Saul, no Judges, no Joshua, no Aron, no wandering in the desert and divine chitchat on Horeb, no Moses, no Sojourn in Egypt, no Joseph, no Jacob/Israel, no Isaac, no Abraham selling his wife into prostitution, no Terah, no Nahor, no Serug, no Reu, no Peleg, no Eber, no Salah, no Cainan, no Arphaxad, no Shem, no Noah and his floating menagerie, no Lamech, no Methuselah, no Enoch, no Jared, no Mahalalel, no Kenan, no Enosh, no Seth, no Cain, no Eve, no Adam, and of course there was never any YHWH. Abrahamic religion is an attempt at alternative history. You may want to read the publications of Israel Finkelstein ♆ CUSH ♆ 20:03, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Utter rubbish. Sigh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.34.214 (talk) 13:59, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No. It is reality. Abrahamic religion is a lie, and an incompetent one at that. Grow up. ♆ CUSH ♆ 19:04, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Does it take up space?

Hi Cush, I just noticed that you removed the somewhat unfortunate sketch en:File:Standard Model Flowchart.pdf from en:Standard Model. That’s probably a good thing. A few days ago there was already a related question on en:File talk:Standard Model Flowchart.pdf. I guessed and tried to explain the supposed meaning of the question “Does it take up space?”, but the wording is nevertheless confusing. Since the article about the Standard Model already has several images and overview tables, I agree with you that the flowchart can (and should) be kicked out. --2001:16B8:1728:3400:8935:E476:3A9A:7DC8 (talk) 20:59, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Biblical Judges Timeline

Hi! I was looking over the timeline of the Judges on the Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_judges and noticed a couple of oversights. I attempted to replace the image with a corrected version but Wikipedia prevented me from doing that so I figured I would reach out to the author of the timeline. It looks like after Ehud there should be inserted Shamgar (though this could be debated as it does not say he was a Judge but does compare him to Ehud who was a Judge). Also where it mentions Barak as a Judge is not accurate. Deborah is labeled as the Judge and Barak as a commander of the army. Barak never takes that title and is never compared to another judge. Just some thoughts to better depict the timeline. Thanks for the work you've done in constructing it in the first place! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:5880:CC90:6079:7099:F65C:CD81 (talk) 17:27, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update request for File:Countries which banned Russian aircraft from their airspace due to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.svg

Hello.

Can you add Montenegro and Moldova in File:Countries which banned Russian aircraft from their airspace due to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.svg? Montenegro joined the ban, and Moldova closed its airspace to all aircraft. This map is used by many articles and users across Wikipedia. The original uploader and the other users are not active, hence why I asked you.

Yours sincerely, 31.200.17.241 (talk) 08:16, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I had added Montenegro and Moldova in this map : Mutually closed airspace, which is used in a few articles. I have not yet made changes to the map you reference. ♆ CUSH ♆ 08:32, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I also added Montenegro and Moldova to File:Countries which banned Russian aircraft from their airspace due to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.svg ♆ CUSH ♆ 09:53, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. --31.200.17.241 (talk) 09:58, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review

I have opened a deletion review: Wikipedia:Deletion_review#David_Rohl. Please comment if you'd like. TuckerResearch (talk) 16:30, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RoP

Hi,

following your comments on The Rings of Power talk page and the removal of the POV template I had put on the reception section, I just wanted to inform you that you will have to go on an edit war if you want to give a more neutral tone to this article because some superheros nerds who consider themselves "racists trolls" slayers have taken control of it. They harass and blame every editor, and there are many, who does not share their point of view and refuse every source which is not favorable to the production. The only sources they consider "neutral" are those favorable, even if they are biased, such as the infamous opinion by Fimi and Maldonado

For example, my first proposal was rejected because it was considered that "Evie Magazine is not moderate, but instead leans right." In this article journalist Jimenez is writing : "Tolkien’s aim in writing Lord of the Rings was not to create some feel-good hero story about good triumphing over evil. He spent his life studying linguistics and the medieval folklore of the British Isles. He lamented the fact that true British history and folklore were lost in the Norman invasion of Britain. Tolkien admired the grand mythologies of the Nordic peoples and the Greeks. He mourned the loss of true British history, and through his love of myth and language, tried to create a mythology that was unique to the British Isles. Hence, the birth of the stories of Middle Earth. While we may all be more familiar with The Lord of the Rings, that story is just one small part of an expansive world and mythology that Tolkien spent his life creating. So, shoving the modern view of diversity into a pre-Anglo-Saxon mythological England makes little to no sense. On the one hand, it’s a slap in the face of Tolkien’s ultimate goal of creating this world and its stories."

What is "leaning right" in that ?

My approach was not to delete their sources, but to to add some to counterbalance the article and I made the mistake of arguing with them but the only result was to expose me to personal attacks such as this one. My last proposal was to add a sentence after the infamous Fimi and Maldonado article, which justify the use of a cast of diverse human races in the production because Tolkien did suggest the existence of dark-skinned Elves in drafts of The Silmarillion'. This sentence was based on an essay by TA Shippey : However, for Tolkien's scholars such as T. A. Shippey, who wrote the essay Light-elves, Dark-elves, and Others: Tolkien's Elvish Problem, these dark-elves were directly inspired by the Dökkálfar of the Norse mythology, who dwell within the earth, and Tolkien's final decision was to make the light/dark distinction not a matter of skin color but between those elves who had not seen the Light of the Two Trees (Moriquendi) and those who had (Calaquendi) , such as the the Dark-elf Eöl, mentioned in both the earliest Silmarillion and the Quenta who is not marked out by "something particular".

It was not surprsingly rejected and the proposal was called toxic and SYNTH...

Just by reading the talk page, and you will see that you are only the last of a long serie of disillusioned users. For my part, I must add that in more than 10 years of contribution on Wikipedia, I have not seen such a case of ownership of content, but I have decided to give up because they have the majority on their side. Good luck Flying Tiger (talk) 13:46, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image of Standard Model

I have written a book about the history of physics and astronomy at the University of Pennsylvania. I would like to incorporate your image of the standard model at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Standard_Model_of_Elementary_Particles.svg . I know that the wikipedia page says this is free to use, but my publisher is insisting that I receive permission directly from the creator of any image. If you are willing/able to do this please email me at heiney@sas.upenn.edu . Thanks! 2601:4A:4200:44E0:391C:25B3:1BD0:D178 (talk) 17:02, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How to credit for work

Hello. I’m a Uni-Student and would like to use your Standard Model graphic for my thesis. How should I credit you? Would your Wiki-Username suffice? -A desperate Uni student whose professor insists on this even though it is under free use. Thanks in advance! LyRosa56 (talk) 19:39, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Wiki user name is ok. Which one do you want to use? There are a few variants. ♆ CUSH ♆ 07:32, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Main chart
Dark-background version
with graviton
with antiparticles
with Deuterium
with hypercharge and isospin

WP:ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. TompaDompa (talk) 18:46, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User page

Discussion of your user page has been ongoing without any progress for a few days. It is off-topic at User talk:Doug Weller#User Page editing note. What you describe is standard behavior for a semi-protected page and whether desirable or not, there is no chance of it changing from a discussion like that. You may not have encountered before, but it is common—see list of semi-protected articles and click Edit on any of them. Your user page was semi-protected in August 2011 due to a short burst of vandalism. I have removed the protection as it should not be needed—new users are not able to edit your user page regardless of its protection. If you really want it protected, reply here and I'll do it. But if it is protected, you will continue to see that banner. Johnuniq (talk) 08:34, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The point of the question was why people get warnings about editing their own user pages. This is not about articles. I would assume user pages should only be edited by users themselves and maybe my administrators and bots for maintenance purposes in the first place. Showing a warning when editing someone else's page is ok, but showing one for one's own user page is pointless and indeed condescending. A developer would understand the issue immediately.

Also, before this summer, no such warning appeared when I edited my own user page, so obviously something was changed in the conditions for showing the warning. I wanted to see if I am right in assuming this is a bug. ♆ CUSH ♆ 15:11, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]