User talk:Mallerd/Archive 1

da

Do we know anything about the style of war? did they use primarily axes and went berserk or what? Mallerd 19:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They used sticks and stones (for the poorer part of the warriors) and bone-, flint-, or iron-tipped spears for both throwing from a distance and stabbing in combat. The richest few may have had swords and pieces of iron armor (this being more common towards the beginning of the middle ages). Probably all had shields made of wood and leather. Axes probably weren't used much untill the fourth century, when they became popular as throwing weapons. Later on they were used more and more as melee weapons untill in the viking age it was a popular weapon for the poorer Scandinavians. If you're interested in the subject: M.P. Speidel, Ancient Germanic warrior styles (London 2004). A routledge book. Krastain 12:43, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! All I heard was as far as I knew only fantasy. Mallerd 15:27, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Claude Speed

Kid is what Claude is commonly referred to as by several characters during the game. Kenji, on the other hand, says: "My sister speaks highly of you, though I am yet to be convinced that a gaijin can offer anything but disappointment." The point here is that Kenji is describing him as a gaijin, as opposed to actually calling him gaijin; the other characters call him "kid" rather than describe him as "a kid". Ray Machowski also refers to Claude as an errand boy, but you wouldn't say "Claude is also known as Errand Boy" now, would you? Dbam ^Talk/_{Contributions} 16:55, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it would be, so long as they were calling him gaijin, and not a gaijin (eg. "How are yah doing, gaijin?" or "You did good back there gaijin, real good." etc...) Dbam ^Talk/_{Contributions} 17:40, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dealing with vandalism

I gave them a notice, at Wikipedia:Vandalism you can find a series of templates you can use to warn vandalizing editors. Happy editing! C mon 15:02, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cyrus

Simply put, every single article about every ruler of every country would have to have "[Blah] was its capital." It is completely irrelevant. However, Cyrus expanded his empire until it became the largest the world had seen up to that point -- which is something worth mentioning. Look at the articles for other expansionist rulers; it'll say something about the extent of their empires. By the way, the capital was not Persepolis during Cyrus' time. It was Pasargadae, and even then, it wasn't the capital from the very beginning of his reign, so we would have to go into details about that. ♠ SG →Talk 18:50, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are not the only user who wanted to add the capital information to the article, though. Pasargadae is notable because Cyrus ordered it to be built during his time, but I still don't think it needs to be in the introduction (it didn't remain as the capital for very long). I've been meaning to write a new section about his building projects, but I haven't had the time to search for sources. It's been a little difficult to find them, as most sources talk about Darius' constructions instead. ♠ SG →Talk 09:55, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes

De userboxen zelf zet ik liever niet op je gebruikerspagina, ik geef je liever de code. Jij kan die dan kopiëren naar je eigen gebruikerspagina. Misschien een beetje omslachtig, maar het lijkt me wel iets beter.
Goed, de codes staan hier tussen nowikis. Om ze op je gebruikerspagina te kunnen zetten moet je de nowiki-tags ff weghalen.

<div style="float: left; border: 1px solid deepskyblue; margin: 1px;"> {| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: white;" | style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: deepskyblue; text-align: center; font-size: 14pt;" | '''[[Image:Flag of Israel.svg|40px]]''' | style="font-size: 8pt; color: black; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This user does not believe in a '''[[two-state solution]]''' to the [[Israel]]i-[[State of Palestine|Palestinian]] [[Israeli-Palestinian conflict|Conflict]]. | style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: lightgreen; text-align: center; font-size: 14pt;" | '''[[Image:Flag of Palestine.svg|40px]]''' |}</div>

<div style="float: left; border:solid black 1px; margin: 1px;"> {| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: crimson;" | style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: darkred; text-align: center; font-size: 14pt; color: black;" | '''[[Image:Corona reial nua segons la Generalitat Valenciana.svg|40px]]''' | style="font-size: 8pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em; color: black;" | This user supports '''monarchism'''. |}</div>

<div style="float: left; border:solid white 1px; margin: 1px;"> {| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: red;" | style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: white; text-align: center; font-size: 14pt; color: black;" | '''[[Image:Flag of West Papua.svg|40px]]''' | style="font-size: 8pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em; color: black;" | This user opposes the [[Free Papua Movement|independence]] of '''[[Western New Guinea|West Papua]] ([[Republic of West Papua|RWP]])'''. |}</div>

<div style="float:left;border:solid #C0C8FF 1px;margin:1px"> {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#F0F8FF" | style="width:45px;height:45px;background:#C0C8FF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt" | '''...''' | style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em" | This user would like to know '''all existing languages'''. |}</div>

Wil je ze in rijen van vier hebben, zoals ik op User:Aecis/Userboxes heb gedaan, dan kan je dat doen met <tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr>. Bij <tr> begint de rij, tussen <td> en </td> plaats je de code van een userbox, beginnend met div style= en eindigend met /div. </tr> sluit de rij af.

Ik heb hier gewoon mijn eigen userboxen gekopieerd, en alleen de tekst aangepast zoals je gevraagd had. Bij supports monarchism heb ik de link weggehaald, want die kan natuurlijk niet linken naar republicanism. Mocht je een afbeelding willen veranderen, dan kan je dat natuurlijk gerust doen. Mocht je zelf een compleet andere userbox willen ontwerpen, dan kan je altijd ff kijken op Wikipedia:Userboxes#Constructing a userbox. En heb je verder nog vragen, stel ze gerust. A ecis^Brievenbus 22:55, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ik heb ook ff <br> aan het eind van elke code toegevoegd, om het wat leesbaar te houden. Die moet je dus ook ff weghalen, net als de nowiki's. A ecis^Brievenbus 22:56, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

It sees out of place in the premise section. How about moving it to the influnces zection instead, the reason I removed it was because it dodn't fit in with the flow of that paragraph. The Placebo Effect 23:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the help. Cheers, ·:· Will Beback ·:· 18:54, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moroccan Arabic

here it goes → عيدكم مبارك. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 16:55, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Stop this elephantastic guys supportng blue power and all the olds people on Near East. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.32.82.253 (talk) 13:54, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Geert

Hi there: Simply delete {{Fact|date=February 2007}}. BW -- Avb 15:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks OK to me. When you're previewing a section you're editing, references may show up incorrectly but once saved, the page will be all right. Does that explain the problem? Avb 18:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rome: Total War

Um, which changes are you referring to? I only made one edit and you changed it. SirBob42 04:07, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Rome: Total War

To revert multiple edits at once, you have to click on the green bullets next to the two edits that contain the vandalized context and then click on the upper button that says "Compare selected versions". Once you have done all that, Wikipedia will be able to allow you to undo those edits. Hope this helps! WinterSpw 23:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

amico, amica & amici

Hello, could you please add pronunciation to these "friend" articles? I don't know when it is k and ch in Italian. Mallerd 20:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added the pronunciations. It is "k" before a-o-u, and "ch" before e-i. In order to get the "k" sound before e-i, you have to write it with an "h": che (ke), chi (ki). To get a "ch" sound before a-o-u, you have to write it with an "i": cia (cha), cio (cho), ciu (chu). —Stephen 20:56, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much :D Mallerd 21:00, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maegashira

There's no indication that the DJ is notable per WP:BIO, WP:N, or WP:MUSIC; indeed no article was even attempted to be written; hence, vanity. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 16:36, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic

Hi, are the differences between Maghreb Arabic and 'normal'/standard Arabic so big that a Moroccan can't understand a standard Arabic speaker? Thanks if you know Mallerd 18:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, it is quite the opposite. It is not an easy task for Arabic speakers (except speakers from the Maghreb) to understand Moroccan Darija. Moroccan Darija, as well as Algerian and Tunisian, includes many non-Arabic words (Berber, French and sometimes Spanish) hence the difficulty for non-Maghrebians to understand it fully. On the other hand, Classical Arabic is taught in all Maghreb countries' schools. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 20:10, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch Empire

I'm not an expert on the East Indies. In the West Indies, where I live, the Dutch enslaved the population directly, without any intervening nobles, and most of the population had reasonably frequent interaction with the Dutch.Kww (talk) 19:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE Hattat Aziz Efendi

As you can see, this article does not have much information. Since I know you are interested in Islamic subjects, do you know more about this man? If so, you could improve the article. Mallerd (talk) 20:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately no. I've just left a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Turkey. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 16:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RTW

I've noticed that usually the force the captain commands has to be outnumbered by the rebels numerically and be on par with them technologically. You can tell this if the case if the AI feels confident enough to attack you first although sometimes they will sit for just a little bit before rushing. If they stay put despite all the damage they're taking even if it were better for them to charge it's usually because your army has a technological edge even though it's outnumbered. E.g. 1 archer auxilia vs. 3 peasant units. What you then need to do is destroy the rebel force through smart maneuvering and tactics rather than by fighting them straight on. Missile units are great for this because they can use hit and run tactics without sustaining casualties. You do have to be careful though of getting outflanked because the rebel force like I said usually outnumbers you. The captain obviously also has to survive. These conditions aren't a guarantee for sure, but it seems to increase the captain's chances of adoption. I.e. he is a talented commander because he defeated a superior force with an inferior one. However you don't want to be too weak either because winning becomes nearly impossible and your army will just get chased around the map. For some reason when I tried this out with the Dacians, my adoption rate seemed to jump vs. than with upgraded Romans. --BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 02:29, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure when the bodyguard unit gets upgraded as it's only happened to me a few times. Maybe the general needs to get more combat experience? The general threshold I've noticed for regular units to get a chevron is ~100 kills. --BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 17:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dommel & Semaphore

See Talk:Semaphore#Dommel. Perhaps you'll contribute to Cubitus, besonders wenn du Deutsch besser als ich verstehst.
--Jerzy•t 05:34, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Wikipedia:Userboxes#Using_existing_userboxes. -Babel ious 03:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Express what you like, rather than what you don't like.

Nonsense, what you do like can be inflammatory as well, such as "I am a homosexual person", I leave my userboxes since Wikipedia policy is not OK on this subject. Mallerd (talk) 12:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to Spain

Yea, I understood what you meant by it being a barbarian faction and agree, and the was you edited now clearly shows that the Spanish are a very different barbarian faction with major Carthaginian influence —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.42.109 (talk) 20:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Greekroman.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Greekroman.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gates (comics).jpg

f

Gladiator movie

I served with the US Army in Iraq and in one time I was watching the movie with Iraqi intepretor working with us , he said that there is alot of arabic sentences in the movie .. and since I read your post in the Gladiator film discussion page I wanted to tell you this : the man who shout before the first battle of the Gladiators in Africa was saying : - Prepare your selves for war - in Arabic , ironicly he should said : Prepare your selves for battle.

--Blain Toddi (talk) 19:04, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rome: Total War protection

Hi there Mallerd. I protect it in steadily increasing increments because at its core, Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that everybody can edit. The page is not under vandalism in the true sense of the word, ie obscenities, it is a subtle form of vandalism. I am hoping that the protection will force the IP to reconsider their actions, but it would be unfair to block out all editors for a long period of time. Hope this clears it up. Woody (talk) 21:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hebrew from the other side

If you're still curious: Talk:Hebrew language#Other side. Dan Pelleg (talk) 15:56, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other side

I heard that Hebrew means from the other side, other side referring to the other side of the Euphrates. But I don't understand from which side one must look, the mediterranean side or the Iranian side if you will. Can someone help me? Mallerd 16:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in which language? the Hebrew word for hebrew, Ivrit,does not mean from the other side in hebrew. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.107.53.54 (talk) 16:27, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Hebrew name for Hebrew, "Ivrit", is derived from "Ivrim" (the Hebrew word for "Israelites") meaning simply "the language of the Israelites". Neither word means "side". However, both of these words are constructed from the root consonants ע (/ʕ/,), ב (/v/) and ר (/r/). This means that they may be etymologically related to words such as /ever/ ("side"), /ma'avar/ ("passage"), /avar/ ("to pass", v.i. or "to go over"), /he'evir/ ("to pass", v.t.) and others. As far as I remember, it is traditionally said that the Israelites' name "Ivrim" was given to them because they entered the promised land of Israel by crossing, e.i. passing over the Jordan River. Dan Pelleg (talk) 15:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your explanation :) it is a shame that I can't remember where I've heard it :( I'll put it in wiktionary :) Mallerd (talk) 18:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

maltese language

from a linguist to a fellow linguist (although I might like to add that I am nowhere near as advanced as you) ;) ... I would like you to help out with an ongoing longterm discussion that keeps recurring at maltese language about the origins of the language. POV pushers keep pushing it to be classified as Arabic, which I am certain is not true. Hope you can help, thanks. 78.145.1.62 (talk) 11:15, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: A priori

Some support for the claim that "bachelors are male" is a priori:

You can know it just by thinking about the concepts of 'bachelor' and 'male'.
You don't have to look in the world to observe bachelors to figure it out.
It's analytic. There's a common view that all analytic propositions are a priori.

–Pomte 20:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Malibufles.JPG

See commons:Commons:Derivative works. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:06, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Companies hold copyrights to labels so it's mean that you don't own all copyrights required for free licenses. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 02:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

M2TW

Hey, can you tell me what red banners mean if I shoot troops with Greek firethrowers? Or green banners if I throw dead cow corpses on troops with a trebuchet? Thanks Mallerd 08:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, The red banners means the unit takes periodic damage, i dont know the exact amount but if you look carefully a few will drop dead eventually, also (obviously perhaps) its a massive morale reduction The Green banners are mostly a morale decrease, but i heard somewhere that theres a reduction in attack and defense --Roy34543 19:57, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Mallerd (talk) 20:31, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Horned Helmets

Greetings, I noticed you made a post to the Teutonic Knights page in December and I figured I'd try to offer a suggested response, if you haven't already gotten one. However, my remarks are conditional on the basis that you are misidentifying Teutons with Vikings, as it is a very common stereotype to depict Vikings as having horned helmets. The horned helmets of Vikings is completely unhistorical, as archaeological evidence shows. There is some very slight evidence to possibly support a claim that horned helmets were used for religious rituals, but nothing more. The reasons why horned helmets would be undesirable are rather obvious: first, they add extra, unnecessary weight--always something to be avoided in combat; second, they would impede not only your own motion (as you would invariably hit the horns on your helmet during combat-related actions, thus causing all sorts of problems; and third, it could cause significant problems for your allies in close proximity, who would be at best be disrupted by the moving of the horns in combat, and at worst injured by them. Why so many depictions of them? I'm not sure I have the exact answer, but as you pointed out, it does "make them look tough." When I was in Denmark last spring, my tour guide at a museum said that it was a type of historical revisionism done in Denmark when nationalism and morale were very low; they looked to a time "when Denmark mattered on the world-stage" and that was during the Viking Age. Thus, they glorified it and altered it, resulting in depictions of horned helmets that have no basis in reality. Well, I'm really hoping you have the Teutons confused with Vikings, or else I've just wasted a lot of your time, but hopefully this material will be interesting to you, if not illuminating. Best, Vincent Valentine 04:23, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, your picture has helped illuminate things for me. As far as I am aware those types of helmets could be used for processional types of celebrations, or for jousting. When one is jousting, they pretty much let the horse do the work and only need to steady and aim the lance, so it is possible to wear them in those types of situations. I am not certain though, but I agree with you that they do look really cool and intimidating. Vincent Valentine 10:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sassanid Empire infobox

I don't know where you want that bit of information to be placed on the template. I've unprotected the template now, so you can make the appropriate changes yourself. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not love)} 03:58, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zoroaster

We have no definite information abut where and when he was born. Did you read the article? Paul B (talk) 22:44, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you read it you must know that there is no reliable historical information at all about the date or location of Zoroaster's birth. Myths and traditions are not facts. Paul B (talk) 23:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are references to lots of places [1]. Paul B (talk) 23:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then write an article about Clorumia. No one s stopping you. Paul B (talk) 23:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Moroccan Arabic

Salaam, as you can see on my userpage an anonymous user has added some statement behind your reply. Do you have any idea what it means or who the user is? Thanks Mallerd (talk) 13:50, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes :) He is an active user at es.wiki where he was blocked indefinitely with a message at his userpage stating that "Este usuario ha sido expulsado de Wikipedia en español." On the fr.wiki you could find an indef block notice on his talk page stating that "Compte bloqué indéfiniment pour contournement de blocage et vandalismes systématiques."

Well, this guy is the only Spanish user whose sole mission is to remove all references to Morocco as being a country with a long history where many dynasties have governed. He believes that the country is new (1956) and forgets to argue about the same when it comes to History of Italy and History of Spain itself. He confuses the territory with the notion of the State.

In fact, he is not disrupting a lot since he comes here once a month or so. Everytime he comes back he gets himself reverted by someone (in many occasions by respected Spanish users here) but the blame is always on me according to him. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 16:43, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I understand now ;) thanks for explaining Fayssal Mallerd (talk) 16:54, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's enough from you.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to User talk:HalfShadow. Your edits appeared to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. HalfShadow 00:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Get the fuck off you mogool, I placed a fucking question why the hell do you revert? Then I ask why the fuck you were reverting. you did not answer at all, vuile neus.

Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. HalfShadow 00:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not attacking a user in any way! Now you listen, stop reverting and warning me, you know you are making this shit up man Mallerd (talk) 00:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, well unfortunately for you, I can translate: 'kankerjood' translates into english as 'cancerous jew', 'mogool' means 'retard' and vuile neus roughly translates as 'snot-nose'. HalfShadow 00:26, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you should read usage notes my friend, lots of people don't see kanker as an insult, it is an intensifier. Same as mogool, you can't literally translate such words. Especially when you don't know with what kind of person you are dealing with. Besides you referred me to the Blocking policy, where it said you shouldn't block users to cool down, something which you implied with your title "That's enough from you". Stop this power abuse, it is nonsense and bullshit! You started reverting me for NO reason at all. Mallerd (talk) 00:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Forms of government

Is that the one you're asking about? I'm not sure I've done any major work with it. Fishal (talk) 20:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re:Screenshots from Warcraft

It saves them as .tga (Targa) files, am I right? I just use a freeware program called IrFanView to resize them to 640x480 and reformat to .png. It's a great little program, you can download it here, though you might need to get a plugin too in case it won't view certain things. As for the Night Elf campaign, I'm not there yet (I don't spend as much time gaming as I used to). Anyway, Irfanview or another similar program should be able to solve your problem (but I recommend Irfanview as it's not only free but very easy to use). Hope this helps, FusionMix 18:01, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to be of help! Cheers, FusionMix 12:47, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Freedom of Speech

Don't you see that there is a difference between expressing your freedom of speech, which includes freedom of religion, of thought and of dissent and that abuse of a right is not permissible in a democracy, such as chanting death threats and so forth? There is a difference between attacking Islam (a religious ideology and therefore a mere discussion) and threatening the blood of another man (which is murder). Any fool who cannot take criticism of their religion or any religion that cannot take criticism is unable to stand to reason. Religions are beliefs and if a belief is indefensible, why should people demand the blood of those who attack another religious idea? You can attack opinions, but in a democracy there is a fundamental right to life liberty and property, John Locke. Freedom of Speech is not the freedom to say whatever you want at all for it would be a crime for me to threaten you by law. It is the toleration of this crime that I attack, but if you insult muy Christian faith, I would in fact welcome it and engage in a discussion (a defense), but I would not demand your blood. Now do you see? Tourskin (talk) 17:32, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who decides what the actual difference between expressing and the so-called abuse is? The truth is that a democracy just doesn't work if all are equal. If a muslim says that one, by attacking Islam the religious ideology, is attacking and perhaps even threatening him and his way of life. That puts one on the same level as the so-called abusive ones, while he is sincere and does not want to abuse anything. The game "freedom of speech" cannot be won in a state which has ideals such as equality for all etc. In life it is different: everyone accepts that there are exceptions on the rules (I don't know if that is a correct English way to put it), such as police-violence, judges and more goverment organs. When it comes to individuals however, everyone should be equal and everyone should be allowed to say what he or she wants. This doesn't really matter as long as everyone doesn't blame eachother of abuse of their right. When they do, there will never be a winner of the discussion, because in this matter for some reason all are equal. Even the exceptions of the rule are somewhat forced to surrender to the power of the people, their verdicts are often in favour of freedom of speech and thus equality. That is the case, one should accept that by labeling another as abusive he does not win anything. The one thing that is above all laws and police actions is violence. If you really want to be the winner of the discussion/conflict, you will resort to violence. Mallerd (talk) 11:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An abuse of a freedom is such that it leads to a destruction in the democracy or rights of another. For example, no one has a right to have their religion protected from opposing opinions as this destroys our right to free speech. We only have a right to what we can say but we have no right to demand the murder or threaten someones life because that violates a fundamental right to life. I can attack any religion I want so long as I am not provoking anyone and it would be within my right to freedom of speech for this is holding a opinion, and does not threaten anyone else's rights. If someone was to say that I strongly disagree with Islam/Christianity because... and then went into detail, that person would not be violating anyone's rights and therefore the right to freedom of speech would not be an abuse in that case. What would be a violation is if someone threatened to kill someone as that violates their fundamental right to life. I don't know why you are talking about violence to solve discussions, that has nothing to do with this. Tourskin (talk) 15:47, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fundamental right to life? Rights like these do not exist, humans have made these rights up. They are not part of natural life. As such, one cannot tell another what to do and what the best way to live is. Still, I think you miss the point that there can be endless debating and in the end there is no "winner". By the way, I am not saying that violence is a way to solve discussions, I'm saying that eventually you will resort to violence because you see discussion is no longer possible. I am also saying that violence is above all laws. Simple words cannot stop the might of the the fists. Perhaps you are familiar with the words: "War knows no laws, except to conquer.". The same thing in societies, governments do not quell uprisings with new laws do they? No, they enforce their will through police violence.

Its not called police violence, but "state coercion". Now then, if you wish to participate in a western democracy, then you must accept these rights. That is my why opinion is valid. Everyone has a right to his life in that you have no right to take it from me and I have no right to take it from you. If you cannot accept this fundamental cornerstone of western civilization, then I cannot reason with you and should not participate in a western democracy if you will not accept her rules. Men must be governed and better that they be governed with rights to protect our individual selves from the tyranny of the masses. We no longer live in a world were majority rules, or violence decids, for the bill of rights and other legal documents such as the United Nations Human Rights demands everyone's rights be respected - of course not all countries accept this right and those that do practice it at various levels. What worries me is your rejection of these rights; human beings have an intrinsic worthiness and therefore have rights. Tourskin (talk) 20:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I don't know if Muslims believe in the Ten commandments in the old testament of the Bible, so forgive me for my ignorance of Islamic law, but if you are a Muslim, Christian or a Jew or any relgion with strong ties to Moses, then you must believe in rights for the ten commandments command us to respect everyone's rights to property (Thou shall not steal, thou shall not long for another man's wife, although wives are not property) and right to life (thou shall not kill). Tourskin (talk) 20:53, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, for the sake of the discussion I shall accept the rights as given. What you say is important, you do accept government action and intervention, but apparantly you do not accept the supremacy of the state in all cases. That is why discussion concerning "freedom (of speech)" is endless: suddenly everyone is the expert and everyone's opinion is holy. One should see that is useless to make comments about someone else's opinion if the other beliefs in such a freedom of speech. The substantial part of one's opinion can really only be changed by himself. It is possible however, to persuade someone to stop evangelize his opinion. Then it is not necessary to stop believing in your own opinion. The ultimate goal of a human being is to be as happy as possible. I do not reject the idea of having rights, I do reject the idea that you actually have them. You only have rights (at least where you and I live) because another human being tells you so. I hope you understand this difference and I'm always careful not to rely on my rights to much since I do not feel them as being a part of my nature. Mallerd (talk) 21:51, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again, that is your opinion. I think what you are saying is that these rights are not always to be respected? In that there are "evil" people out there who will not respect you?

But if you mean that rights are artificial, then I must disagree with you there. As a Christian, I believe everyone has a right to life and property as is written in the Old and New Testament of the Bible. Furthermoore, the original point of this discussion was that the right to life supercedes the right to freedom of speech, which is why I said that it is wrong for someone to threaten another man's life, tieing this back to what we are talking about, because I honestlty believe that as worthy moral creatures created by God we have rights, God-given rights to life and so on. Tourskin (talk) 22:26, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is an interesting opinion you have there that rights are artificial, one I use to hold - I only agree with you in this matter if one was to say that we have no rights because God is the only one with a right to us. But In my opinion, we have rights to respect each other, but God has superior rights hat override our own rights. Tourskin (talk) 22:27, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, rights are not always respected. By what are they not respected? By nature. In the end, the "fundamental" right to life does not save you from dying. All around you is nature (nature created by God or not) and we should recognize that rights have not come with the evolution/creation of humans and therefore are not part of our nature. It does not mean we should not respect eachother's rights, but when we start commenting eachother's opinions on content, we start a discussion which will never know a "winner". I saw you do this anyway and I thought I'd point this to you, since it is "waste of time" (sorry to put it that way). Often people are not willing to enter debate in a manner so that their opinion can be changed like you say. Furthermore, there will always be people with a different opinion that will never be persuaded to your side. If you stop evangelize your opinion you still hold your opinion, if someone is willing to enter debate, then you can speak your opinion. Debates are often absent and it is more "yelling" about eachother. This is different than debating someone on the content of a opinion. Can I ask what your native language is? Mallerd (talk) 10:19, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My native language is Aramaic, and am an Assyrian by ethnicity. Rights are not judging how life is to be played out naturally but how we treat each other, and as Moral absolutist I hold that we have inalienable rights, thats just my opinion. My opinion is also that our right to life is greater than our right to free speech. Whats your native language and ethnicity?Tourskin (talk) 02:41, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I see that many people think that morale comes after rights, though, as such that rights are fundamental in the sense they are at the base of our human being. My native language is Dutch, I speak it most of the time. My father is Indonesian and has taught me the Indonesian language when I was young, I have not spoken it in a while but I make frequent edits to Wiktionary. My mother is half Dutch and half Russian, though I only had Russian in school for 1 year, so I understand it on a very elementary level. Do you still live in Iraq (Chaldean) or do you live in Europe? I know 1 Chaldean christian, he has taught me that happiness comes before everything, is that typically Chaldean? Mallerd (talk) 15:25, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I could say that Chaldeans all view happiness before anything, but all races contain both scumbags and selfless heroes. I live in the US right now, tho was living in England for 14 years until I was 18, and in Iraq until I was 4. Happiness before everything? If happiness is loving God and loving one's neighbour, I would agree. Tourskin (talk) 18:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Blutonium Boy

A tag has been placed on Blutonium Boy requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Ecoleetage (talk) 12:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blutonium Boy

I am sorry if my tagging created stress. You are welcome to put the "hang on" tag on the article and list your defence of the article on its Talk Page. My concern was the lack of independent referenced sources, as per WP:RS requirements. Ecoleetage (talk) 12:31, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a problem. An independent referenced source would a newspaper, magazine, recognized web site (not a blog or vanity site). Read up on WP:RS to understand what Wikipedia is looking for. Thanks and be well. Ecoleetage (talk) 12:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I read WP:RS, I don't think those will be accepted as reliable sources. However, it appears the article means a great deal to you, so I will remove the tag if you can dig up additional sources that would confirm notability for the subject. Thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 12:52, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As luck would have it, the tag has already been removed and the article is safe for now. If you need help in strengthening the article, let me know if I can be of assistance.

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

Personal web sites are usually not considered reliable sources. If there is any coverage in music magazines (Dutch language or English language), that would work. Ecoleetage (talk) 13:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Blutonium Boy

I have nominated Blutonium Boy, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blutonium Boy. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? WikiKingOfMishawaka (talk) 01:49, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Translation of marathi "moo"

Yes, moo in marathi is pronounced हम्मा--hammaa. I have removed the question marks on the page Marathi "moo". Manishearth (talk) 11:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree

You right the "alliance" thing in RTW and Medieval 2 is annoying they never even help you out.--Lord Haw Haw29 (talk) 23:36, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kasparov (diskjockey)

Sorry for the late response, I'm not an active Wikiepedian anymore. I'm not an admin, so I don't have the ability to delete articles. I think I may have nominated it for deletion, as such the forum for that discussion would have been the nomination... If you believe it's a valid article, you may repost it, of course. Themindset (talk)

Avatar

I gave a very valid reason in the edit summary. What you are now doing constitutes as trolling. Rau's Speak Page 19:53, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fresse

Hallo,mag ik vragen wat voor betekenissen het woord "Fresse" allemaal in het Nederlands heeft? Dankjewel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.252.18.139 (talk) 19:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ja, mag je wel vragen. Het woord bestaat in de Nederlandse taal niet, het heeft dus geen betekenis. Mallerd (talk) 23:49, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page removal

Please do not remove others' comments on article talk pages, as you did here. Thanks, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 15:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be too hasty, I only followed his advice. Mallerd (talk) 19:16, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Red Alert 2

You're right. Mexico is socialist in the storyline of the game. However, the map only applies to countries that are playable in the skirmish mode of the game.

Message

I noticed you wrote a message titled "Knowledge is Power" and said "Not in this way". I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean. Kostantino888Z (talk) 19:15, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: modern warfare plot

The two images that I removed was:

I don't think that either helps the reader better understand the plot. It's understandable that people want at least one image there, so I chose File:Pripjat Panorama.jpg as the image shows just how desolate the place really is. The other two images are just photographs of weapons, essentially. Gary King (talk) 03:03, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please learn to be a bit more civil. I brought the article to WP:FAC, I think I care at least a little bit about the article. Gary King (talk) 03:19, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am asking you to be civil because of your statement: "I know you understand but I think you just don't give a sh*t.", in which you are essentially assuming that I do not care about the state of the article. Those two weapon images don't really connect with the Plot; if you're going to complain about the lack of images in the article, at least spend some time to find more appropriate ones. I've added one of a US Marine, which I believe is far more relevant. Gary King (talk) 03:39, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you really feel that way, then why don't you just bring it up on the article's talk page for more people to discuss? You feel that I am owning the article, yet you only want my opinion and not the opinion of other editors working on the article. If I could, I would have added an image of an SAS instead but the SAS article doesn't have one, so I chose a picture of a Marine instead. If you added an image of a weapon, how much more relevant would it be than a picture of a Marine? You play as a Marine for a large chunk of the game; the specific weapon images that were in the article are only involved in the game for one or two scenes. Gary King (talk) 15:31, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I have taken the liberty of creating a new section about this for further input: Talk:Call_of_Duty_4:_Modern_Warfare#Images_in_the_Plot_section. Gary King (talk) 16:10, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Russian

Thanks for your message.

1. There is certainly quite a bit of Russian spoken in Israel these days; you see notices in Russian in shop windows, and I think there may be a radio station. But it is not anything like an official language. In the very early days of the state, there was some Russian influence on Hebrew, e.g. words like "protektzia"; I don't know whether the latest generation of immigrants is also having an effect on the language.

2. My user page only records articles I have actually worked on, and I don't happen to have made any edits to the article on Ashkenazi Jews. That doesn't mean that I underrate the importance of that community; I just happen to have concentrated on Sephardi and Mizrahi topics because I am from that background myself and they are less well known. As it happens, I have edited the article on Ashkenazi Hebrew, and this does appear on my user page. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 09:07, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yehuda

The Hebrew word "Yehudá(h)" may mean:

Judah the fourth son of Jacob; and thus
the tribe descended from him; and thus
their tribal territory, around Hebron (still called "Judaea"); and thus
the southern kingdom of Judah, remaining after Jeroboam had broken away to form the kingdom of Israel with the northern tribes;
the Babylonian and, later, Persian province of Yehud, in the same territory;
the Greek and, later, Roman territory of Ioudaia/Judaea, covering most of modern Israel/Palestine;
a very common personal name, rendered Ioudas in Greek and Judas in Latin. (There are at least two Judases in the New Testament other than Iscariot; "Jude", as in the author of the relevant epistles, is another form of the name.) --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 09:12, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re moroccan arabic

Hoi FayssalF,

I have a question. I don't know if you are familiar with the Moroccan rap artist Salah Edin, but he has made an Arabic album and track called "Horr". What is it spelled like in Arabic and is used only in Moroccan Arabic (since I can't find a Standard Arabic translation at wikt:pure)? Does it have more meaning other than "pure"? Thank you Mallerd(talk) 21:50, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hoi Mallerd. Long time no see! Yes, it may also mean 'free' in the sense of 'he is free to do something' or 'liberated'. And, no, I've never heard of him! -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 22:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, long time no see ;) I thank you, although I still have a question: could you write it down in the Arabic alphabet for me? If you do, I can add it to wiktionary :) Once again, thanks for you help. Mallerd (talk) 16:21, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In two letters: حر. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 17:27, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, can you check up حر.? Is it correct the way it is? I can't read Arabic :P I first didn't notive the dot is a punctuation mark. Funny isn't it? ;) bye Mallerd(talk) 16:16, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I now see the dot and it's my mistake that i didn't notice it :( It's correct without the dot. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 10:21, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Would you kindly.JPG)

Thanks for uploading File:Would you kindly.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 17:52, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Bosnian names

It is possible that these are Bosnian Muslim names, but I as a Croat don't know much about Bosnian Muslims, so you should ask someone from WP:BIH. —Admiral Norton ^(talk) 14:39, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uncivil edit summaries

Completely appreciate your point, and I admit that I misread what your previous edit was trying to do, but telling other editors "don't you dare revert this" in your edit summary is needlessly confrontational. We're all here to build good articles. --McGeddon (talk) 09:15, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now you mention it, it sounds kind of harsh. My apologies. Mallerd (talk) 18:06, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ACII edit

Whether it is fair or not doesn't really matter. What I reverted was unsourced and, to be honest, grammatically horrid. If you can provide a link to this video you speak of however, I would be happy to add it in as a source. Jasca Ducato (talk) 11:12, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The link you provided is broken; besides, I'm not going to look through a twenty minute video unless you can specify where in the video this information is. Oh, and YouTube is not classed as a reliable source… so unless you can find this information somewhere else, it's going to have to remain out of the article. Jasca Ducato (talk) 19:00, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shi No Numa

Thats because most people know it as Zombie Swamp, and nobody, including myself, has heard it called 'Marshes Of Death'. I know Verruckt means crazy, I never doubted that.. But, to be honest, I couldn't care if you spoke 50 languages; leave it as Zombie Swamp. --Flash flash ; 15:24, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Mass Effect

Just some of the wording you used. For instance, "Shepard's request is denied by the Council, who consider the existence of the Reapers too unclear to risk a war with the Terminus Systems" rather than the Reapers being insignificant. I was originally going to simply undo the lot of it, but I decided to keep some sections like that. The capitalisation was the main reason I decided to keep using the undo feature because I was too lazy to correct it manually. Protheans, Reapers and the Thorian are all with capitals. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 10:10, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I had to ask about the rachni a while ago. I just came back from finishing the game for the twentieth times and noticed that you'd altered things a bit and it had gone a bit wrong. Don't worry, though. Everyone makes mistakes. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 15:29, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed a hidden section of your comment on my talk page which I totally missed. "Anyway, in that mission on Ilos it was only Shepard who could understand that VI in the security center, later it was strange since Vigil was speaking English (my teammates responded to Vigil rather asking Shepard what it said). Because of this kind of stuff, I don't understand why you think it is unneeded to state that the beacons etc the Protheans left behind were intended for Prothean minds." Vigil explains that in-game when one of your party questions that. Vigil's been monitoring communications and learnt the language from that. He obviously has a universal translator installed. :P --Thejadefalcon (talk) 10:33, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing new as far as I know, but I can't access the official site anymore. Needs something installed to run it and I can only use library computers which don't like being useful for anything (the last week being a massive case in point). Hopefully, I'll get broadband soon and I can fix this horrific crime and get back to being truly active on this most awesome of Wikis. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 10:05, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cache

I wanted to mention that although I reverted your changes, I feel you could make a nice contribution to the summary. You had some good ideas, especially about weak antecedents. Personally, I feel this is one of those films that is an interesting challenge to summarize. I thought you had some interesting ideas. --Ring Cinema (talk) 05:14, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If it's not the first time you've been reverted for those reasons, why not just avoid them? It takes more work for you to remove the actor names, so why do it? AND you've been warned? It wasn't just the actors names. You put in quite a few grammatical errors that I have to attribute to your lack of expertise in English. That's okay. The main thing is to get a good plot summary.

You had some point to make about the epistemological status of the blood-spitting. Altough I didn't think you were correct, I wasn't sure I understood your point exactly. That was the most interesting thing you had going for my money. --Ring Cinema (talk) 04:42, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I notice you are making corrections on other editors' work. Perhaps if you're not sure of your English grammar you could be cautious about correcting. And the idea that you'd mess up the actor links and expect someone else to come behind and pick up after you is selfish at best and adolescent at worst. If you're not smart enough to figure it out, maybe you shouldn't edit at all. --Ring Cinema (talk) 15:58, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm talking about losing the actor names in the plot summary. You can figure out how to include them, right? Or do you need a link to instructions? --Ring Cinema (talk) 18:13, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]