User talk:Hojimachong/Archive 1

threats to block

I must say your approach to edits is very unhelpful. This whole self flagelation about the dirty work of cleanup makes you come across as a control freak, not an editor. I would encourage you to apply discussion before threats and deletionJwkane 02:27, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Underoath

Was going on the back of what Spencer said in an interview. He says that he doesn't want Underoath marketed as a Christian band. He said "tags can be a dangerous thing". I don't see them as a "Christian" band anyway. Religion just gets in the way of the music IMO.

Love, Valkyrie Missile

Bath School disaster

Thanks for the note. It's not a problem, the edits were quickly reverted. Jtmichcock 11:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About your Apology

Its ok. Its better If people keep on digging about truth, instead of what media pours in their brains, then there is no need of apology. If you want some further eye-openers about media and hypocricy then personally let me know. A person who thinks that he knows everything is actually an ignorant person. And since in the current case, since we Muslims are the object and others are accusing so we can claim to know better about our concepts and ideologies instead of other people like these and theseexplaining them for us and still claiming that they know all.

Anyway, I welcome your any fair comment. VirtualEye 05:52, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

United States

Please stop changing things to plural. The name of the country, singular, is United States. --Golbez 03:40, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And that was added only ten hours ago by an IP on a mission, as seen in the talk page. Thank you for the swift and reasonable reply, though, at first I thought you and the IP were the same person, which would have been far more annoying. :) --Golbez 03:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barrens Chat looks much better now, thanks. --Golbez 04:16, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You gave no explanation for tagging the article for Mountlake Terrace, Washington, USA, as being "unencyclopedic". So I wish to remove that tag. Samuel Erau 12:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I read (on my talk page) that you meant to add a "Wikify" tag instead. Apology accepted. WikiProject Wikify currently has a significant backlog. So I don't know if they would enthusiastically make the changes you were hoping for. Samuel Erau 15:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About your comments

Thanks for the reply. I agree to to many points you made. But the thing about Al-Qaeda you mentioned is totally wrong. Any violent act comitted by some muslim individuals or organizations is just named as Al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda has become a trash backyard. Wherever bomb blasts or some persons are killed, the first name which comes to the minds of Americans (or westner people) is Al-Qaeda. My point to make is that, there is more to the world than Al-Qaeda. In this age, hundreds of thousands of people have access to the information of how to make bombs. What do you think, if a person learns to make bomb or makes a bomb then first of all he goes to Al-Qaeda to bet membership?

Al-Qaeda is the name of very very few violent people and a bunch of videos. Thats all.

P.S. When I ask you to unlearn the things which American media has poured into your mind, I am in no means to insult you, because I think you are honest in presenting your stance but just you have been overlearnt by the one sided media. Pardon me if you still feel offended.

VirtualEye 11:13, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same-sex marriage

You appear to have added a notice of a 6 week block to User talk:209.213.220.178, but no block was in place. Care to explain? .. dave souza, talk 17:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There were a few reasons I blocked the IP 209.213.220.178. First, the IP had made three edits that were considered vandalism within three days. There were two warnings in place, and it obviously wasn't going to stop. The IP belongs to a school district Abington School District, and is used by several editors, mostly for schoolchild vandalism. There is also a template on the top of the page which states "This IP has been repeatedly blocked from editing Wikipedia in response to abuse of editing privileges. Further abuse from this IP may result in an immediate block without further warning." There were several warnings in place as well. I don't have a big tolerance for anonymous IP edits, and it was obvious that the vandalism was not going to stop. I wasn't going to idly sit by and watch the IP continuously vandalize pages, and I chose the lesser of two evils (blocking the user vs. obeying the rule that only admins may block). I know it isn't a good idea and I may be reprimanded for it, but the IP problem is... sensitive. Sorry if this disrupted anything. Thanks, --Hojimachong^talk _con 22:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't block the IP. You are not an admin. Please do not add notices of things you are unable to do. Posting the notice does not block the IP. You seem to think it's a "rule"; I assure you, you are completely unable to block anyone. --Golbez 22:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've never really understood the warning/blocking thing all that well, thanks for the clarification. I thought that adding the template would add it to some sort of "block proposal" category, I'll go look for how to do that. --Hojimachong^talk _con 22:39, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look at WP:AIV. --Golbez 22:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, that helped. --Hojimachong^talk _con 22:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jorge Cruise

I am not well versed in wiki, but trying! What would I need to do specifically to make the article 'wiki'? thanksJulia 00:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I copied his bio right off his site. He is one of the most influential people in the fitness industry and I was surprised when I realized that he didn't have a wiki site.

Another, is bob greene (NOT bob greene of the chicago paper--but Oprah's trainer.....I don't know how to make a page for him, since there is already someone with his name. WIki is very complicated. Thanks for the tutorial, I will work on improving the page, and all that I do here!Julia 05:18, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation

Hojimachong, your recent post to Talk:Muhammad I found eloquent and persuasive. You might consider joining the discussion at Talk:Muhammad/Mediation, where this issue shall be decided, and which I believe could greatly benefit from your participation.Proabivouac 01:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will also observe that your link to Chewbacca defense was most appropriate in light of several arguments put forth there, one more obviously so than others.Proabivouac 01:55, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conversion

A high number of Muslims on wikipedia claim to have converted from Christianity. I am skeptical. Arrow740 00:14, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am as well. I would guess at least some of them have really converted, but there are probably others that have picked up on this. I'm all for freedom of religion, but I do feel that modern Islam has been perverted into a religion of violence, which is terribly sad. --Hojimachong^talk _con 00:18, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You cant know about Muslim converts because there was no such dominant visual media to report, because media is just biased. How many times you heard that some Christian or Jewish person did such such crime? If a Muslim will do they exlusively mention that on CNN and SKY. Yet According to CNN itself the highest rate of conversions is towards Islam in America. 1/4 of the all Muslims in America are converts (Again, this was reported by the American Channel itself).

I highly recommend you:

VirtualEye 06:16, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VirtualEye, I respect your religion. But I don't want to have anything to do with it. If you are here to convert me, please stop, because it will not be happening. I want to develop a healthy respect for Islam and an understanding of its tenets. But Jesus Christ is my lord and savior, and always will be. I try hard to make Wikipedia be neutral, and not give undue weight to any religion, including Christianity. --Hojimachong^talk _con 06:28, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not even a single video was about to convert you. I think you did not even read the titles of videos. That is the same circular thing. Someone refers you good resources to unlearn the assumptions, but over that you make more assumptions before checking the resources. This clearly has proved your ignorance. VirtualEye 07:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you caught me there. I was reading this at 7:20AM, with very little time to post a response, and took what I assumed it was. I am sorry. I got far enough in the videos to read "Conspiracy Confessions" and "Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land: Media & the Israel-Palestine Conflict". Sorry, but my personal tolerance for conspiracy theorists of any kind is microscopically _low. I find the first video somewhat reliable. The others I will not waste my time on. I admit fully that I made assumptions about the post before fully understanding it. But seriously, if you expect me to spend over two hours watching your videos, sorry to disappoint you but I don't have time. I will watch the "30 Days as a Muslim" video because I recognize and respect Morgan Spurlock due to his admirable work in the Supersize Me. Sorry for my jump to conclusions. --Hojimachong^talk _con 22:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scott dugdale

Hi - I'm not sure I agree with your speedy on Scott dugdale, and have placed a hangon on it. I know it was originally hard to read (evidently the author didn't know about formatting...), but I believe that the article clearly asserts notability and encourage you to withdraw your speedy. For instance, the article asserts he was part of the top trio in California, he worked on a game that was called "Game of the Year" - I think those are enough for notability. If you wish, it could probably go to AFD, but I don't think this one qualifies as a speedy. Philippe Beaudette 02:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you're dubious, I encourage you to submit it to AFD. I don't have a problem with that - I just think it didn't qualify for speedy, since it did, in fact, assert notability (which is the standard). Philippe Beaudette 02:53, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm interested to see if the original author will come back and include refs :-). --Hojimachong^talk _con 02:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. I did a quick gsearch, and that names turns up in the credits for the game, so there may be something to it. I agree though, I'd like to see refs. Philippe Beaudette 02:59, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, lots of Video Game profiles. A notable musician/gamer should have more than 947 hits. --Hojimachong^talk _con 03:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VirtualEye

Proabivouac warned him. I think he's quite funny. Arrow740 05:53, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He is quite the anomaly; I dislike his editorial style with a passion, but don't know what I would do without him. He provides some much needed humor. --Hojimachong^talk _con 05:55, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While He (VirtualEye) does not take your comments as a joke but considers to answer by spending his time. He does not throw the comments of other people in the hole but gives answer. VirtualEye 06:26, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I guess he does. Arrow740 03:08, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And he (Hojimachong) listens to a persons opinion the first time. And the second time. And the third time. But after listening to the same point over a dozen times, he (Hojimachong) has heard the argument enough to find new things to address. --Hojimachong^talk _con 03:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hojimachong, the insulant arrogant nut head. We would not know what to do without him around. :) 216.99.56.235 01:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you attack me again, I will be forced to open a case against you somewhere. --Hojimachong^talk _con 01:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you that scared? :) 216.99.56.235 02:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Amused, rather. --Hojimachong^talk _con 04:10, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: AfD

hello Hojima, in response to your AfD comment:[4] i'd like to know what parts of the article you believe need a rewrite (and why). is there a substantial academic opinion that you feel has not been represented? thanks ITAQALLAH 11:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Itaqallah, it seems like I've overlooked your comments here, sorry 'bout that. I just wished to voice the obvious concern that it is an extremely touchy subject, and pretty much every edit, no matter how small, will be argued against by somebody. Best of luck in keeping the article up to standards, though! --Hojimachong^talk _con 01:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation

Hello Hojimachong, and sorry for the late response; I read your message, but then forgot it until I saw it again now. Did Gren do what you asked for, or did you want it more specific? "Yes" means you agree with adding an image near the bottom or middle, and "No" means you have another opinion. · AndonicO ^Talk 22:37, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gren cleared it up quite nicely, thanks for the response though. Your efforts on the page are appreciated! --Hojimachong^talk _con 23:49, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. · AndonicO ^Talk 00:04, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean?

Should you read wp:v first? Well, im not into this wiki stuffs but as a Muslim I have the right to speak up.Cheers!--60.52.87.230 06:40, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nickname

It's true that my name is segmentable as you've done it. This is quite perceptive of you. However, I rather prefer the more common "Pro":)Proabivouac 09:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. --Hojimachong^talk _con 17:21, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thank you for the barnstar! I'll have to think of a good place to put it.Proabivouac 19:15, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taiguara

Hello,

I'd like you to be more specific as to why you believe the article on Taiguara should be deleted. He is my deceased father and I can verify that all the information listed there is correct. What is the problem?

Thank you,

Imyra

Taiguara

This response is intended for both Eastmain and Hojimachong

Thank you both for your comments, however, I'm a bit confused with the responses. Eastmain suggested I improve the article by adding quite a bit more information (which I was planning to do in the coming days), yet Hojimachong, suggests I do the exact opposite. I'm not sure I understand the issue of "conflict of interest", since I am obviously not writing an article about myself or any musician/band whose work I "promote" or manage on a professional level. I just figured it would be interesting for my father to have an entry in Wikipedia's English page as well (I didn’t create the page in Portuguese myself), since he was a renowned singer/composer/arranger in Brazil at the time of the birth of musical style that will be forever known". His records sell here is the US and many other countries (Amazon and the likes), thus, from time to time, fans of his work will ask me to direct them to a website where they can find more specific info about his career. As you guys found, so far all that's available is a fairly short description on the "All music guide", and a few other less known sites. And quite a bit of this is incorrect, such as the name of the person he credit some songs to in order to avoid vetoing – Allmusic lists it as “Ge Chalar da Silva”, when her name is “Gheisa Chalar da Silva (trust me, I know - that is my mother).

We plan on changing the fact that the info out there (in English) is so scarce, but have not had the time to properly put a decent website together just yet. So, my point is... I believe that having a more extensive entry here provides a valuable service to the many fans who seek further information about him, but do not have enough of a handle on the Portuguese language to understand the information that can be found on Brazilian sites. It further makes sense, that I should be allowed to expand on these entries, as there is no better source for accurate details on the trajectory of an artist as the ones coming from the persons who are personally familiar with his history. This is especially true because, in hopes of concealing Taiguara’s work/messages as they struggled over political disagreements, the militaries manipulated the media to publish untrue accounts of his whereabouts, mental health and even his death (in the 70’s!), when he was very well alive and breathing… Because of this, there still is to this day, quite a bit of confusion as to what really happened during the years that he was not performing in Brazil. And these weren’t merely “rumors”, but articles and news that were published on (supposedly) well respected media sources. In this type of situation, “verifiable”, takes on a whole new meaning, doesn’t it?! But that another discussion all on it’s own that I don’t wish (or have the time to! visit right now.

If Hojimachong still believes that I should refrain from contributing, I will comply. Yet if others feel that my contributions would enrich the article, rather than “tarnishing it”, I’ll consider continuing. Please let me know you thoughts on this. I may not be very proficient with Wikipedia’s customs and (especially) the formats yet, but please understand that the work I’m doing is much more time consuming than editing just this one site. Parallel projects have kept me very busy and I apologize if my constant editing here, in attempts to master how the page should really look like, is bothersome to some of you who know the system quite well.

If I may comment on another question that was raised: Notability is definitely not an issue in this case. Taiguara’s songs were quite notable radio hits from 68 to about 73, two of them held the #1 spot in the charts for their subsequent years, while some others (of his songs) made the top 10 and 50. He also won first place in some of the historic festivals that gave birth to what the world now knows as “MPB”. He has been included in albums called things such as “The great pianists of Brazil” (I noticed someone removed the pianist category, but I believe it should remain) and has one album titled “The winner of Festivals”. Although he had almost 100 songs that were never released due to censorship, and suffered absurd amounts of boycotting, he still achieved a number of hits to put many other so called “celebs” to shame.

The one consensus we seem to have reached here is the fact that the article should remain, yes? So, the lingering question for me is, how do we go about removing the “proposed for deletion” tag?

Thank you and sorry for the long text! ImyraImyra 13:24, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Biting new comers

I just described your idea as "bad" but then changed it to "flawed". Does that count as biting yet? :O I try to stay relatively calm when people address my points. I don't particularly like it when users only refer to the arguments of the newest anonymous Muslim who is offended and pretend if that is the only argument against mass picture inclusion / picture inclusion as the primary image. Anyways, I'll be seeing you in the ring. gren グレン 16:46, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just like the fact that you didn't dismiss my ideas, but rather gave explanations as to why they are flawed. Some admins just run around being grouchy. --Hojimachong^talk _con 17:10, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taiguara

If you are satisfied that Taiguara is notable, you can withdraw the AfD by striking out your "delete" recommendation and adding a comment like "I wish to withdraw my nomination of Taiguara. --Eastmain 17:44, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taiguara

Thanks for the help and the tips Eastman!

Cheers! ImyraImyra 13:25, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Muhammad/Mediation#Suggestion_.28untainted.29

You voiced your opinion in the original straw poll which has caused some confusion. Please do the same in a new version, Talk:Muhammad/Mediation#Suggestion_.28untainted.29, which should be clear and allow us to better assess consensus. gren グレン 22:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Respect

At first I had some respect for your opinions and thoughts. I spent my hours to discuss with you and was devoted to interact with you. But later on came to know what 'good faith' you are talking about. Just tracking my contributions 24 hours and keeping the allegations up. How many times you will throw different kind of allegations? invcivil, sockpuppet, ..... Bla Bla.

Will you come to a healthy discussion or keep your teaming with Pro.? Do you have your own mind to use also? VirtualEye 06:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously. I assumed good faith for quite some time. I spent a long time respectfully debating with you. I try not to be incivil; I've never been accused of it or a personal attack. I tend to agree with Pro on many issues, and think of him (as well as you) as a valuable contributor. You have great potential on Wikipedia, but if you're going to stay in this mindset, it will be quite difficult for you. --Hojimachong^talk _con 06:40, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's also worth pointing out that we have given you many opportunities to say "No, I do not have any sockpuppets or meatpuppets". But you have never said that, or anything to that effect. So I will ask you the question; Are Jesus Fan and Checkmeout101 your sockpuppets/meatpuppets? It's a yes or no question. --Hojimachong^talk _con 06:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have come to know Jesus Fan and had discussion with him and thanked him too. And upon my call he can participate and give his opinion if he likes and whatever he likes, but the difference is that he has respect for Muslims, which you dont have. And about Checkmeout101 ? I dont even know what is that, nor did I contact him/her. VirtualEye 08:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poll on every little issue

Please sign if any of these things applies to your understanding of this issue. Please put you name under all of the options you think would be acceptable. You can sign all or none of these, I'm hoping this will give us a more-fine grained understanding of the issue. [5]

virtualeyes?

whos that? I have my own nick.--60.52.46.24 06:49, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I highly doubt that, as you have the same IP prefix as two other suspected sockpuppets. I will try to AGF, but I suspect that I've had many conversations with you. If you want us to value your opinion, VirtualEye, stop puppeteering. --Hojimachong^talk 06:51, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Vandalism

No problem. My pleasure. Nasty, nasty vandals. -- No Guru 22:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Transparent_Muhammad_Calligraphy.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Transparent_Muhammad_Calligraphy.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:20, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad

The proposal and template put forth here can be found at User:Hojimachong/Muhammad Image Template

Vanity Pages / Software

I noticed that you were pretty quick to the draw with the vanity page VfD. I was working on making one too. I also noticed that everyone seems to beat me to the punch of the RC patrol. Are you using any software to help you? If so, can you recommend some to help me become faster at this process? //BankingBum 03:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC) ^$$[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Transparent_Muhammad_Calligraphy1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Transparent_Muhammad_Calligraphy1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:37, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For Your Interest

For your interest: Christian Science Monitor. I hope you read it carefully. VirtualEye 16:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that helped to reaffirm my views. I know that all Muslims are not terrorists; however, many active terrorists right now (as focused on by the media) are Muslim. And silly people like Robert Spencer try to convince us that Islam is pure violence, which I find is utter bull. Anyways, thanks for the article. --Hojimachong^talk 17:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was wrong...

This edit was wrong to do. Please see User_talk:70.81.253.163 ... oh, you have. I asked the IP user to stop doing things and start discussing things. When he did, you deleted his text. How, how are we ever to stop vandals vandalizing when they are squelched when they try talking. This is unbelievable. Shenme 04:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you would visit the page as well, it would become obvious that the user is a sockpuppet of a different user (probably User:Bbarnett), as discussed on the talk page. This troll was determined, however; he reverted back. --Hojimachong^talk 04:57, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hojimachong, I would advise re-instating the transclusion version if the article is going to have any hope of remaining unlocked and free to edit. (→Netscott) 06:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For fear of violating WP:3RR, I won't be reverting for a while. I don't really care about whether or not the image is transclusioned, it is just somewhat confusing, and unnecessary. It just... requires more work on the part of the editors. --Hojimachong^talk 06:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup templates

Just to let you know that most cleanup templates, like "unreferenced", "fact", "cleanup" etc., are best not "subst"ed. See WP:SUBST for more details. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 16:43 27 February 2007 (GMT).

Thanks

Thamks for the help Hochimachong, I will try to work on the information you gave me. Marshmellow Mind 20:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your VandalProof Application

Dear Hojimachong,

Thank you for applying for VandalProof! (VP). As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank you for your interest in VandalProof.

Prodego ^talk 21:57, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scientist

ALM, you say you are a scientist; I would be interested in knowing what kind of scientific work you do. I would appreciate it if you responded on my talk page. --Hojimachong^talk 15:36, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have written so far 9 papers published in top IEEE ComSoc conferences and magazines including IEEE-ICC and IEEE Communication Magazine. I think revealing my exact field of research will make you search about me very easily using Google because I am searchable. Hence I wish to avoid it and can only tell that I work in computer communication/networking etc. --- ALM 10:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad page

No problem, some people get too offended and worked up on Wikipedia i agree. I think there is no point arguing on that page anymore. Even though it is against my religion the pictures of muhammad will have to stay. I think we should just remind everyone of Wikipedia's no censorship policy. Thanks for the compliment! (Ssd175 05:31, 1 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

FYI

The documentary which CNN and Sky will not show. Enjoy watching misery. VirtualEye 18:02, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are many of that kind for example [6]. --- ALM 11:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's talk about this video for a moment, shall we?

Let's pretend for a minute that the U.S. Military didn't drop leaflets and use loudspeakers to tell citizens to evacuate the city, permitting over 70,000 citizens to leave. That was the justification for shooting the 10-year-old children... because Mujahiddeen sent out 10-year-olds with AK's to shoot at troops. It doesn't really matter how old the kid behind that rifle is; He is shooting at you, and you have no choice but to shoot back.

the remarks about the chemical weapons are the most hypocritical statements' I have ever heard. We don't really have justification to use the weapons, but the fighters there (of whom many were most likely Al-Qaeda and other extremist groups) aren't really in a position to accuse us of disobeying the laws of war. Dressing up as civilians to bomb innocents. Disobeying the cease-fire. Flying airplanes into buildings full of innocent civilians, unprovoked. If the militants in Fallujah aren't going to follow the internationally accepted laws of war (the Geneva Conventions), then they certainly aren't going to recieve much thought over how the U.S. Military is going to defeat them.

I know that the war is unjust, but I definitely will support my troops. They are young, scared kids, and will follow orders given to them. If you want to talk, come to my talk page. --Hojimachong^talk 18:25, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

young scared kids? young SCARY kids. I think really need some rescue kit out of CNN and Sky. Here are your YOUNG SCARED KIDS in these resources here is their JUSTICE:

[7]

[8]

[9]

And these people not special, they just dont rely on CNN ans Sky's dumbshit: (Warning: Some videos have abusive language(as it is habbit of most of Americans), but points are valid)

Here are Americans not me

[10]

This video is in response to a video which has been removed from YOUTUBE racially.

[11]

Why being so mad about rapes in Iraq? here is the answer

Advice for you from heart

You are intelligent and this girl in video is blind, right?

Why I refered these videos instead of giving arguments? because I think there are many responses to these videos avialable and the things have already been discussed in those videos. Any additional comment you want to give? Most welcome. VirtualEye 14:43, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Ray of Sunshine

Awww, thanks! That made me smile :).¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 18:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what did i do wrong?

i dont really know how to use wikipedia what is wrong with the article "Matt Diamondz Swallow"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stoope01 (talk • contribs) 07:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Re:Thanks

Oh its okay, I reguarly revert userpage vandalism, and believe me; those trolls and vandals have put some (stupid) and nasty things on my userpage, when I've warned them. Retiono Virginian 16:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, try not to let the vandals upset or anger you, because that's what they want. See WP:DFT. Retiono Virginian 17:15, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My last edit

Sorry I clicked the wrong version to revert back to...not intended Orijok 02:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my user page. User: Hdt83 | Talk/Chat 02:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help. There have been some particularly nasty vandals today. --Hojimachong^talk 02:15, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail

It's enabled, just to to my page and click e-mail this user. Arrow740 19:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, thanks. I'll check out that page. Arrow740 07:39, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I left a note on User:Karl Meier's talk page. He's Danish. Arrow740 07:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet. --Hojimachong^talk 07:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: My concern about your username (Bombthereich)

Thank you for bringing to my attention the possible concern with my user name. The intention behind my username choice is to express my opposition to national-socialism and to emphasise the need to fight nazism. I was not aware that the name might be against Wikipedia's username policy. To be honest, I am not sure how it could be offensive. The german reich does not exist anymore and the only germans who identify themselves with it nowadays are neo-nazis. Let me also point out that I am of german nationality, so there's no anti-german motivation behind my username choice. Please let me know in which way you might consider the name disappropriate and I may consider changing it. Thanks, bombthereich 22:39, 3 March 2007 (CET)

Hello again, how do I change the username? Can I do it by myself or are special administrative rights necessary to do that? Thanks, bombthereich 16:26, 5 March 2007 (CET)

The username can only be changed by administrators, add the {{helpme}} tag on the top of your talk page. Also, remember to sign your post by typing four tildes (~~~~), which automatically produces the signature at the end of the posts. Thanks, Hojimachong^talk 15:35, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage! :-) CaptainVindaloo ^{t c e} 21:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Thanks!

Of course. :) Already blocked -- I tend not to leave block messages, for everyday vandals. – Luna Santin (talk) 22:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VandalProof

D'oh! I did that? Thanks for the warning, as the moderator tools seemed to indicate the list was already empty... Got to look into this some more. As for now, edit reverted! fetofs ^Hello! 23:02, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet, thanks for the response. Those darned Wiki-browsing programs... --Hojimachong^talk 23:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VP still identifies the list as being empty, and I don't think approving manually is even an option... If I don't sort this out I'll ask Prodego. fetofs ^Hello! 23:08, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some of those guys have been waiting like, eight days anyways. I don't think another few hours/days is going to hurt them. Half of 'em have less than 250 mainspace edits, as well. --Hojimachong^talk 23:09, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

???

wikipedia confuses me a lot...i didn't mean to erase it...i was trying to fix it but you got to it before i did...thanks...i'm sorry...i was trying to edit another page anyway...i'll leave editing to everyone else...

~Brandon~

A little reply to the Indulgence

Addict 2006 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

virtualeye 2.0

I tells u a secret, almost every ip start with 60.* is or may acctually virtualeye. please tells somebody to ban ip range of 60.*. good luck with this dumb game.--Towaru 06:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"VirtualEye 2.0"? Are you trying to implicate yourself as a sockpuppet? It's not funny, really. Most IP's don't start with 60.*, xpect for maybe in Malaysia, which I highly doubt. But per what proabivouac just posted at the Talk:Muhammad, it's pretty obviously you. --Hojimachong^talk 06:41, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yes, sorry, its wikipedia, afterall. We works up to create a good articles. thanks and sorry again.--Towaru 03:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hojimachong, I don't know if you realized this, but several of the anons you correctly identified with VirtualEye "Towaru" had already admitted to being on his userpage. This thread is, as you observe, still more evidence proving that Towaru is just another VE sock.Proabivouac 21:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. told you that sockpuppet page is useless.Proabivouac 21:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for adding the off-topic warning to the talk page for conservapedia. Andjam 03:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still more Polling

Hojimachong, I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but opponents of depictions continue to open polls in different places, where, one must assume, it is hoped will be achieved a more favorable result than those in Mediation. See Talk:Muhammad/images#Original Compromise found. Witness, too, continued vote-stacking by VE/Towaru and Bless sins/anonpuppets.Proabivouac 22:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Hojimachong! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 03:57, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Had I known...

Hello. I would first like to begin by apologizing for my actions on conservapedia. It was a mixture of distaste at conservativism, and a test to see how efficient tabbed browsing would work for wiki editing(i figure my computer would just crash)...Had I known there was actual legal recourse for my actions, I would not have committed them. I am tired, and I do not know what over came me...I am not normally a vandalous person...The shear thought of legal recourse has already scared me half to death...I ask you to reconsider, as this was a first offense, and a last one to be sure. --Penitentandpensive 04:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not the infamous Willy on Wheels (as I said, first offense, and last I'm sure)(from what I've heard, he actually knows how to program). I sent the owner an email, but I'm not sure if he noticed, and I can't contact him via Conservapedia (being blocked and all). Would you be willing to alert him to check his email? My new account(also blocked) over there is "Penitent", but he can contact me on either, as both go to the same email address...and I have it set so he can send me emails via the wiki...Thank you for your help...--Penitentandpensive 05:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, again for your help, I am a reformed user, vandalism upsets me too much now...and I would also like to apologize for the work you had to go through to revert my moves...I realize now, that even though it was a transient thing, it caused much frustration amongst users, and I don't want to do that...--Penitentandpensive 05:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

?

I cant create an article cuz its blocked. Marshmellow Mind 02:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um...

This isn't exactly vandalism. Am I missing something here? If not, please remove the warning from the IP's talk page, and be more careful using VandalProof in the future. If I'm missing something, please tell me so on my user talk page so I can revert my revert and the blanking of the warning, with a full apology. Cheers, Daniel Bryant 22:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conservapeda

I have to admit, the longer I stay the more of a bad taste I get over working at that site. What keeps you going over there? Tmtoulouse 04:58, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The hope that I will be able to make some sort of a difference, and make people realize that their view of Christianity isn't the only view of Christianity. It's also an intriguing social experiment, seeing how people deal with those who hold extremist views (i.e. RightWolf2). --Hojimachong^talk 05:38, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just feel like these are the people that would be burning me at the stake if they really had their wish. Lending respectability and life to such a project? Does every good page or good edit merely make the insanity seem less insane? I don't mean to disparage your involvement in the least, just wondering. Perhaps I don't have the stomach for social expiermentation that I thought I did! Typical scientist....prefer the controlablity of the lab, not the home turf of the subject. Tmtoulouse 06:05, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just interested to see where User:Conservative takes some articles. I'm going to focus on indisputable history (the Arab-Israeli Conflict), and not the crap of more... controversial articles. I just enjoy the laughs I've had... take a look at my userpage on there to see some of the thing's I've been accused of being. --Hojimachong^talk 18:42, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question??

-Hi! i just wanted to ask you a question. Do you happen ot go to ISA? You seem to know a whole lot about the school. Just wondering, because i happened to go through the history. Not a lot of people knew that Madrassa meant School in Arabic. (Sorry if i seem really nosy, its just that I'm learning Arabic). Anyway,Kudos to your knowledge!MOI 16:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-Oh i c. Hehehe, thats funny. The media feeds a lot of bull to the general public, who are mostly ignorant of the itty bitty details that are there, but not really.MOI 00:50, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that.

Sorry, it is just this topic of evolution in particular makes mad, especially that I have to "learn" about this, at least in my view, blatant lie in school, so once again I am sorry for making assumptions.--Peace237 22:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]