User talk:Hollinger

Feel free to post a message here.

Welcome

Hello, Hollinger, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions so far, I hope you have not been scared away from here and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you will enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Remember to sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~), and to provide an edit summary for all edits you make. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me or someone else on their talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! –Holt T•C 10:25, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Genetic stuff

In case Dab's assertions are misleading you, I don't have problems with genetic data per se as he is trying to make out. I not honestly think historical linguists or prehistorians have developed methodologies yet that will stand the test of time, but genetic data is interesting. It is not being used in that article is a manner according with our policies. In this article it is being attached to an ethnic construct despite citing no WP:Reliable sources which do this. This is the problem. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 17:55, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deacon, I think you are alone in not understanding the significance of the section that you insist on removing all the time, against the advise of all others. 18:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Fine, think what you like about me, but don't expect the issue to go away without addressing my concerns. It won't. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 20:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And your concern is that genetics do not belong in prehistory? Or why would you otherwise insist on removing the whole genetics sub-section? That would indeed be an utterly strange move if you indeed believed that genetics belong in prehistory, don't you agree? Hollinger (talk) 20:23, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My concerns are outlined on the talk page and above. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 22:38, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged "personal attacks"

Please read WP:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks#Removal_of_text, and also Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Behavior_that_is_unacceptable. Talk pages aren't for you to launch attacks, subtle or explicit, on other editors because their opinion differs. If the comments aren't removed, the logic is that I defend myself or attack you also on the talk page. On that logic, the talk page would consist of little but personal attacks. The essay you posted in order to defame me is, incidentally, only satire. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 23:46, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I had written: "OK, Deacon has made his intentions, agenda and modus operandi clear enough in above comment and also here: User:Deacon of Pndapetzim/How to win a revert war. I'm not interested in playing these sort of games, so I'm out of here.". This is not a personal attack, but a motivation of my departure. Your removal of my motivation is very rude and dishonourable. Hollinger (talk) 23:53, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The motivation (which only the gods could verify in any case) doesn't matter if it's on a talk page and contains personal attacks (esp. during a dispute). Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 23:56, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deacon, I have made no personal attacks. I have merely described your behaviour. Hollinger (talk) 00:29, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]