User talk:Lutherian

welcome to my discussion section

Reply

Sure! —Khoikhoi 04:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what is your email?neurobio 15:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't noticed that comment, apparently Deepblue already told someone, but promise me that if someone insults you that you won't just insult back, and rather tell someone. —Khoikhoi 05:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

see your email. neurobio 23:34, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

dont worry just mail me another time. see youneurobio 11:23, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

you got mailneurobio 00:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

we have to get rid of this total fabrication "Even though nearly all the camps, including all the major ones, were open air, the rest of the mass killings in other minor camps, was not limited to direct killings; but also to mass burning,[6] poisoning[7] and drowning.[8]"neurobio 11:48, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

se my mail. ??? neurobio 19:13, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

from now on I will report every incivility. please watch your language ok. we will be also watched. I will play their game by its rules!neurobio 13:01, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

we should stick to that photo i added or fadix will come up with a terrible one.neurobio 21:16, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i still dont know how to do a full revert. how is it done. and can you also handle this historian names too. this way if some other people do a rv the picture will be saved for now.neurobio 21:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

have you seen that User:Fadix/evidencepage/Holdwater. I have never seen such an obsesed person in my life. funny thing is he still thinks Deep and Holdwater are the same person. I am having so much fun reading these and he is so sure. poor guy :) strange that he always makes jokes about being schizo. well i know he is going to be correct one day just claim every one is Holdwater and one day bingo you got him.neurobio 00:11, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pamuk

Hi Lutherian, you are correct—however, he also clearly states in the interview that these were his views, and he didn't just throw something out there, when he said "Thirty thousand Kurds and a million Armenians were killed in these lands and nobody but me dares to talk about it", he meant it. Do you mind if I add that in the article?

Also, while we're add it, I recall you said to THOTH awhile ago that "your alleged genocide which is nothing more than the collective bitterness from a failed attempt to carve out eastern Anatolia for Armenia". You must understand, Lutherian, that this is a just a minority view. Let me point you to this New York Times article. And I quote:

Armenian lobbyists want foreign governments to declare that what happened in 1915 was genocide. Some Armenian nationalists say that if Turkey can be forced to concede this, their next step might be to claim reparations or demand the return of land once owned by Armenians.

It's not the view held by most Armenians (interesting article, btw). —Khoikhoi 00:29, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you're saying. As for the "carving" bit, I still think it's sort of like the Grey Wolves—there are extremists from all sides. BTW, what do you think about all the personal accounts by people who said they witnessed a genocide? —Khoikhoi 20:14, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting points, thanks. As for your question, are you contrasting this to the fact that the Armenians rebelled against the Ottoman Empire? This is something I never quite understood. If a revolution takes place, think there is a justification to eliminate the civilian population? (whether that's what happened or not) But what about the Armenian witnesses? Of course their accounts are going to be biased, but do you think they just completely made things up? —Khoikhoi 03:35, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, ermenisorunu website is included among the links. Best, 24.211.192.250 15:24, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

Regarding comments such as this: Please stay on topic during discussions, and do NOT belittle other users in such a fashion. --InShaneee 18:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, no worries. Just letting you know to be careful, especially on the talk pages of such touchy topics. --InShaneee 23:23, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

edit on AG

Angus's wording makes opposition more credible. You don't need to list every single person. Saying "a number of prominent scholars" is stronger than saying "a number of scholars, some of them prominent". When you say some of them prominent, it means the other are not. I hope this post convince you. I'm going to revert your edit, but if you choose to revert again, I'll not continue.

I understand but the number of scholars listed after some point is not very important, how they are presented is more important. This is not an exhaustive list (there are many other scholars that could have been included as well) and but your edit (at least to me) gives that impression as it gives a list which has some but not all prominent scholars. Anyway, I'm not going to further revert if you feel strongly about your point. On a seperate note, I think the scholars that Angus removed are also very prominent but I did not want to fight another war. 24.211.192.250 20:57, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with including as many names as are wanted, so long as the context is ok and it doesn't devolve into a long and complicated essay in an already long article. However, I would say that an excessively long list looks like name-checking rather than anything else. The names which I left are at least a coherent group, historians and writers on the Ottoman Empire and related topics (in the case of Lewis). Murphy and Lewy are not really important to the argument and Lewy is such a controversialist, witness his work on the Vietnam War, that including him weakens the case as much as strengthening it. As for Hurewitz, I'm open to persuasion that he should be included on the same basis as Lewis, as an expert in a closely related field to Ottoman history. But I had difficulty finding a decent bibliography of his work, so I'm not sure how reasonable this is. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:39, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I find that some of the bodies listed in the international recognition of Armenian genocide are not true (league for human rights, and the UN sub-commission). I changed them. I know that they will be reverted, but this is something that needs to be corrected. 24.211.192.250 03:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

forget Armenian genocide it is locked now. Van Resistane article is more important

Vandalism

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Armenian Genocide, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Eupator 18:22, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lutherian, who is to say your edits aren't vandalism and propaganda? John Smith's 13:24, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No personal attacks please (second warning)

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. -- Karl Meier 08:50, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Warnings

Please do not remove warnings from your talk page or replace them with offensive content. Removing or maliciously altering warnings from your talk page will not remove them from the page history. If you continue to remove or vandalize warnings from your talk page, you will lose your privilege of editing your talk page. Thanks. Paul Cyr 22:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I was not following the Armenian genocide page, but from the look of the talkpage, its seems to be a conflict, I am a little scarred to pay attention to the edits on the mainspace, so I was wondering if you could explain me what the conflict revolve around. Thanks. Fad (ix) 23:18, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello Lutherian,

I hope you're ok with everything. I would like to say that I love the Armenian people; love their culture, music and ackowledge and support their struggle before 1915, during 1915-1917 genocide, up until now and will support them after this day. I have Armenian friends who's cultures are exactly like mine and listen to modern Armenian musicians such as SOAD but I'd love to discover much more then this culturally and musically, so I hope you can help me. Forget our joint struggle against the Ottomans I know there is a ethnic relation between Kurds and Armenians and would love to find out exactly what it is. About the Genocide, I don't see the difference between the Ottomans who killed so many Armenians and the Hitlers Nazis. Turkey could at the least stop denying it! But I would also like to remind you that attacking others because we're angry because of history is ignorant. So lets sort the problems patiently. Oh, and is it possible for you to recommend me a few good armenian songs? Thanks. Ozgur Gerilla 18:20, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you try to be a bit clear with what you're trying to tell me. Ozgur Gerilla 00:40, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

prejudices, hasn't your papa told you about them yet? Ozgur Gerilla 15:07, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

personal attacks on Talk:Greco-Turkish War (1919-1922)

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --Hattusili 13:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I warned cretanpride too. I do not accept any of his words too but it is no good to insult whole Greek Nation, please stay cool and defend your ideas calmly. Sağol--Hattusili 18:23, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know you didn't start the fire but as I said before please do not insult the whole nation, it also hurts some Turks like me --Hattusili 18:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

I have temporarily blocked this account for disruptive incivility on Talk:Greco-Turkish War (1919-1922). To request a review and unblock, put {{unblock|Reason for request}} on this page. Tom Harrison ^Talk 12:44, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

I was being provoked but I apologize for the incivility and next time I will report it rather than respond directly

Decline reason:

The apology is appreciated, but with your long history of civility blocks and warnings, 24 hours is not unfair, indeed it could be considered light. Please wait out your short block and come back with a renewed focus on remaining civil. NoSeptember 17:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Regarding edits such as this: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --InShaneee 01:50, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was always keeping an eye on the page. I was just staying away during the blocks. mail me any timeneurobio 11:46, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding comments such as this: You have now been blocked for one week for personal attacks. --InShaneee 18:42, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

olaya bak bana cevap yazan adam Turkiyeden. Bunlar Türk Ermenilerine de iyice kancayi atti mi nedir? neurobio 22:35, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that you are acting in an uncivil manner. Please remain civil and don't resort to making personal attacks or instigating edit wars. . This edit was unacceptable please do not restore personal attacks removed by admins or you may find yourself blocked. Try to cool down personal conflicts not to inflame them. Happy editing. Alex Bakharev 05:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

its ok to keep a topic highly POV and ethnically cleanse it so that thecounter view is totally suppressed but that i cannot express my opinionabout a deranged artist in the discussion section? Wow talk about hardcore big brother attitude!!! lutherian 07:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see you were quick to warn me but dont seem to be in a hurry to respond to my legitimate concerns! lutherian 07:37, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:CIVIL comment on the article not on contributors andirrelevant topics. Avoid infalammation try to be civil. The moreinflammatory topic the more reserved and civil the participants indiscussion should be. Are you sure you never heard it before? BTWre-reading WP:TROLL might be of some help too. Alex Bakharev 08:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you would read WP:TROLL#Pestering, you would know that this is a form of trolling that occur in the form of continual questions with obvious or easy-to-find answers. I guess the question what was wrong with this edit was of that type. Still I have spent some time trying to explain the policies to you. Now it is up to you to either follow them or not. Alex Bakharev 13:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk

Please deal with other contributions in a polite and constructive manner. Rude behavior is discouraged by Wikipedia policies. See Wikipedia:Civility. Thank you. --AW 19:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know who half those people are, nor have I seen those comments. I told Bertilvidet to be civil. And please don't forget to sign your comments with four tildes, like so ~~~~ --AW 20:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lutherian, I was happy of the fact that you haven't been insulting people lately, but this is unacceptable. Please don't say things like that again, ok? Khoi khoi 06:45, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All I saw was that comment of yours (I haven't been following the discussion closely), but if THOTH et al. have made incivil comments as well, please provide diffs. Thanks, Khoi khoi 02:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MKA

Please take a look Talk:Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Regards. Must ^TC 18:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

You have been warned many times about this. Please don't say things like "Europe is plenty of fellows like this guy who are totally ignorant and prejudiced against Turks and their history, I mean who talks about Turkey's heroic deeds during WW2 whilst the "civilized" Europeans were busy slaughtering their fellow citizens for the sake of their religion?" Here's the civility warning again:

It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; please keep calm and remember that preventive administrative action can be taken against other parties if necessary. Attacking another user back can only satisfy trolls or anger contributors and leads to general bad feeling. Please try to remain civil with your comments. Thanks! --AW 20:09, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lutherian, did you even listen to what I said? Please knock it off. Khoi khoi 03:28, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Calvin.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Calvin.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 07:34, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where have you been?

Have seen you on the Armenian genocide articles talkpage, and thought I should write a line or two in your talkpage. :) Fad (ix) 00:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moving Denial of the Armenian Genocide