User talk:Pietru/Archive 1

Saint Peter

Why did you replace rooster with cock on Saint Peter? They mean the same thing, except cock also colloquially means penis. --SyntaxError55 ^talk 18:42, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because that's what the gospel quote says. Why kowtow to colloquial ignorance? The article about the animal also uses the word cock. I don't see any reason to pander to dirty minds. golden bells, pomegranates, prunes & prisms (talk) 18:43, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Racism

This talk page will not host racism, anti-semitism, xenophobia (borne of ignorance or ingrained prejudice) or indeed any other forms of discrimination. Please bear this in mind before posting. Thanks.

RE:Malta - Yolgnu

No problem!

I have noticed and the vast majority of their edits are without substance.

Sigh...

--Gibmetal 77 ^talk 08:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not restore comments on Talk pages

Hi there! I noticed you have been in a low-speed edit war with Yolgnu (talk · contribs) over his talk page, which has escalated to some nasty edit summaries (e.g. [1]). While I am very concerned about the edit warring he is doing over at Maltese people (and am keeping an eye on it), I am afraid that in regards to the user talk page, he is quite correct. Please see WP:DRC. If a user removes a comment from his talk page, except in special circumstances (such as an unblock request or sockpuppet tag), you should never restore the comment. It is unfortunate he called your edit vandalism -- I consider that highly uncivil, and will be looking into Yolgnu's behavior when I get a chance -- but regardless of his other transgressions, please do not continue to restore your comment on his talk page.

Thanks, and hang in there! :) --Jaysweet (talk) 14:32, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

civility

This edit of yours was rather uncivil. Metaphors like this can be very unsettling to an editor, even if you meant no harm. Please have a look at the civility policy and if you have a disagreement, comment on the edits, not the editor. Thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:08, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Translation

Hello, I see you speak Maltese, so I was wondering if you could translate some of this, only the part about Kosovo, it is needed in the article International reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence, thanks in advance and please reply in my talk page -- C D 21:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly what I was looking for, if it isn'y too much trouble, could you please translate anything about Kosovo from here, if it says anything -- C D 21:48, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your help, additionally, you may be interested in Talk:International reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence#Malta again -- C D 22:35, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem: I hope you've found something of interest/use. golden bells, pomegranates, prunes & prisms (talk) 22:39, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semitic vs. Arabic

Hi, can you join the discussion section Semitic vs. Arabic in the article Cantilena. Thanks. Hakeem.gadi (talk) 15:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

God comment

Your comment on wikipedia was not welcome. Discussion pages are not about the topics of the article, but the state of the article. You will see from my userpage that I am a God-fearing man and don't believe in nonesense that you presented.Tourskin (talk) 16:32, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're a sad pathetic little man. You seek to gain attention. You're not deserving the attention I am giving you with this comment.

"Thou doust wert and all that" - I think those words nicely sums up how much of an idiot you are. Find something useful to do, if you don't believe in God, thats your problem. No one cares about you or your beliefs. Tourskin (talk) 17:18, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

God

God is not an occupation. Anyone who believed in God would realize that he is not a job, because jobs change from one person to another, but God is eternal. So you're a phony there. Anyone who believed in God would not craftly misuse the scriptures. Blessed are the peacemakers - what kind of peace making were you exactly doing on the Jesus talk page by posting such a childish and ridiculous question? There is a difference between being a peace maker, and refraining from warning you to follow wikipedia rules and not post nonsense. God as an occupation... I can see right through you that you're nota believer in God but an atheist. Remember, the devil who tried to tempt Jesus by trying to craftly use the scriptures. Furthermoore, your language is not that of a respectful individual "dude with user page filled with jesus quotes". Anybeliever in God would use the sacred words "Jesus" and "God" with respect and formality. Listen here buddy, you may not believe in God. Thats your problem. But you can never shake the foundations of my belief, it is rock that no water can wear down, no wind can erode, no ram can batter. Smash yourself againstmy rock, my faith, with your ridiculous comments, and I shall show you the truth in my responses. If you are a Christian and a believer in God, than know this: God is ever lasting, all-powerful and therefore all knowing. He is all-good and all loving. It is enough to accept God's love and follow his teachings through his flesh-incarnation, his son, Jesus Christ, of whom I am not worthy to be his slave, yet he calls me a child of God, and others, children of God. Tourskin (talk) 21:56, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, wow. You went to a lot of trouble writing that whole thing! So I'm going to be polite and read it.

God is not an occupation. Anyone who believed in God would realize that he is not a job, because jobs change from one person to another, but God is eternal.

My principle point was that God is a Verb. You obviously disagree. That's ok :D

So you're a phony there.

I'm not a 'phony' (nor am I 'pathetic' or particularly 'sad' right now), but keep stacking up the insults. Very charitable of you.

Anyone who believed in God would not craftly misuse the scriptures. Blessed are the peacemakers - what kind of peace making were you exactly doing on the Jesus talk page by posting such a childish and ridiculous question?

Calm yerself! It wasn't the most wonderful question ever, but it doesn't warrant you getting hot and bothered, either. Might I suggest a holiday? A short walk? Xanax?

There is a difference between being a peace maker, and refraining from warning you to follow wikipedia rules and not post nonsense. God as an occupation... I can see right through you that you're not a believer in God but an atheist. Remember, the devil who tried to tempt Jesus by trying to craftly use the scriptures.

Alright, so here we are. You are, I'm afraid, a fundamentalist sort of Christian. Which is very upsetting to me, because I noticed that you placed the creed on your 'beliefs' page. Which makes you a Catholic (apologies if I'm wrong). I have nothing but the most profound respect for Catholic culture and tradition: which doesn't mean I agree with any of it. I have no respect for stubborn attitudes or agression.

Furthermoore, your language is not that of a respectful individual "dude with user page filled with jesus quotes". Any believer in God would use the sacred words "Jesus" and "God" with respect and formality.

Words are not sacred. Confusing any kind of signifier for the signified is dangerous. Symbols lead us to true things but are not, in and of themselves, true. Not that there isn't a place for reverence in the world.

Listen here buddy, you may not believe in God. Thats your problem.

Buddy is a lot friendlier than 'phony' or 'troll'. Thanks!

But you can never shake the foundations of my belief, it is rock that no water can wear down, no wind can erode, no ram can batter. Smash yourself againstmy rock, my faith, with your ridiculous comments, and I shall show you the truth in my responses.

What a glorious profession (occupation :p) of faith! Well done you.

If you are a Christian and a believer in God, than know this

They are not synonymous. Know that.

God is ever lasting, all-powerful and therefore all knowing. He is all-good and all loving. It is enough to accept God's love and follow his teachings through his flesh-incarnation, his son, Jesus Christ, of whom I am not worthy to be his slave, yet he calls me a child of God, and others, children of God.

I'm glad you're happy. Not much else I can say!

I'm sorry you're so upset. My comments really were not an attack on you or your Messiah. Chill out and let people use words any way they like, because you don't own them. And all wikipedia is (apart from some kicka$$ images) is a helluvalotta words.

Kalindoscopy: un enfant espiègle (talk) 22:14, 11 July 2008 (UTC) (from Tourskin's talkpage)[reply]

This one's hilarious of you:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tourskin&curid=7750818&diff=225070110&oldid=225050415

Do you still expect me to believe that you're not just a sad little man trying to attack God?Tourskin (talk) 22:12, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cripes, you keep calling me 'little'. Is this some kind of homoerotic thing with you, and are you desperate to see my penis? Kalindoscopy: un enfant espiègle (talk) 22:19, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, there is a myth that there is such a thing as a "fundamentalist christian". I'm "fundamentalist", because I use God and Jesus as sacred words? I did not attack you bcause you seemed to be insulting God, I deleted your comment because it was inappropriate for wikipedia. I have string faith, that doesn't mean that I am a fundamentalist. Every Christian should be a missionary, every Christian in the 1st century AD was a missionary. "God" and "Jesus" are not symbols. They are their names, which makes them holy. They are a part of them, which is holy.

"Know that Christian and believer in God are not synonymous" - every Christian believes in God, so whats ur point? My use of the sentence was that If you're a Christian and believe in God, which you are the latter if you are of the former, than know that God is powerful etc...

You're turning this from a discussion about your trolling into a discussion abot God. You are commiting the fallacy of changing the subject. My final point, irrespective of our beliefs, is to stop trolling. Tourskin (talk) 22:23, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asking questions you i) can't answer, ii) don't understand & iii) find annoying does not constitute trolling. I hope that's clear. Please re-read my (generous) comments on your talkpage, re:the diatribe you posted above. Kalindoscopy: un enfant espiègle (talk) 22:35, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Generous? You mean the penis one? You mean calling me a fundamentalist? Question I can't answer? You mean if God is an occupation? Let me answer it for you - yes, he is an occupation. His hours are Mondays-Fridays, 7am - 9pm, but he gets paid $56 an hour, so thats not too bad. He use to have a secretary, the devil, but he got fired, literally. Only a stupid answer warrants your stupid question. Your question was either stupid and genuine (stupid for a 21-year old Christian writing a dissertation) or trolling. Which one will you pick? Tourskin (talk) 22:39, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I never said I was Christian.. are Christians the only ones allowed to comment on that talk page?? Anyway. My question was what it was. It's this kind of black&white thinking (moron or troll) that makes you a fundamentalist. Good luck with that. Kalindoscopy: un enfant espiègle (talk) 22:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also.. the answer you offered is to the question (one I never asked), "does God have a job?" Kalindoscopy: un enfant espiègle (talk) 22:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A quick heads up

Please check out User_talk:Slakr#User:Kalindoscopy, and be sure to read my response. Also, it would appear that you have been edit warring on Maltese language. Although it would appear that there were three-revert rule violations from both of you (since he likely logged out to violate WP:3RR), instead of revert warring, simply open a request for checkuser. Above all, avoid edit warring— even if you think it's justified.

Finally, pretty please read up on our list of policies and guidelines, because most other admins won't give you another warning after this. Especially try to avoid anything that can be misconstrued as trollish or uncivil, even if done in humor, as that seems to get the most amount of people in trouble on the community. :\ --slakr^\ talk / 04:19, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked for one month for your recent and repeated untoward behavior; please place {{unblock|your reason here...}} on this page to appeal. east.718 at 12:35, July 12, 2008

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).

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

Request reason:

Simply unfair. What about the constructive edits I've been making and am still in the middle of? And this block is based on information from a known stalker. Please review this block in light of all information, not select quotations taken out of context.

Decline reason:

This request does not adequately address the reason for your block, and attacks other editors. Please read WP:GAB and try again. — Sandstein 12:47, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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).

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

Request reason:

2nd Attempt. I was blocked by User:east718 for "recent and repeated untoward behaviour". A clear review of my responses to other editors will demonstrate that this is not the case. In fact, I believe I have been rather civil, considering the stalking/fundamentalist barrage I've sustained. Admittedly, my addition of a maltese woman to the Malta wikiportal was moronic. But does this one act justify a month long block? I am here to make constructive edits; my recent edits to Ars Subtilior for example, or any of my edits on Malta related pages. For these reasons, I request to be unblocked.

Decline reason:

The block is endorsed for the reasons given by the blocking administrator. A summary review of your contributions (most recently [2] and [3]) indicates an inability to work civilly in a collaborative environment. Any productive edits you may have made have no bearing on the validity of the block. For these reasons, and because your request does not indicate that you are even aware of the inappropriateness of your conduct, it is declined. — Sandstein 13:11, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Looking back on my association with the editor I've called a 'stalker', I am willing to admit that such a critique of his actions was harsh. Having resolved myself to be a lot calmer and less ready to jump at any perceived attack, in a spirit of cooperation, I once again ask that this block be reviewed.

Decline reason:

You now seem somewhat contrite. This is a positive sign that you take the process seriously. If you really do take it seriously, one month off will not be too onerous for you. Too many editors have concerns about your ability to interact with others in a congenial and collaborative way. Allow me to give you some advice, and I assure you my intention is to be helpful. Wikipedia welcomes debate and clashing points of view - I have engaged in heated debates with other editors, but it was always clear that those of us engaged in even the most heated arguments were taking Wikipedia seriously, and taking one another seriously. With very few rules, Wikipedia absolutely depends on a collegial working environment. Bullying is not just insulting to another editor, it is an insult to the project as a whole. Perhaps you have never had the pleasure of working in a collegial environment and are not sure how it can work. I suggest you use the month of your block to follow debates on talk pages and to review important guidelines and essays on civility and collaboration. A month may be a long time to an electron or photon, but it is not a long time for a human being. If you really care about Wikipedia and want to contribute, I promise you it will still be here in a month and you will have lots of opportunities to contribute. If you respect Wikipedia you will respect the judgement of the administrators who blocked you and understand that it is not punitive, it is to give you time to reflect and watch and read and learn. Sadly, you will see that there are real trolls and abusive people at Wikipedia and they do not get blocked for a month, they get banned. Use this time to learn the difference between the two paths before you, and lets hope in a month when the block expires you will return and treat others, even those you iolently disagree with, with the basic respect and civility needed for a wiki community and enterprise to function. If reading various essays and guidelines and policies, and following real-time discussions that lead to collaborative edits, is not enough you can always request a mentor when you return. Slrubenstein Talk 19:53, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I still think this block is unfair. I'll sulk in private and leave Wikipedia to lumber along without my sterling presence.

Decline reason:

Unless I am misunderstanding it, this message is not a request for unblock but an agreement to wait out the block, which is a gracious and commendable choice. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Black Monday (Malta); Yellow Submarine (film); Louis Grech; Biblical Archaeology Review; Sliema Wanderers F.C.; Mabel Strickland; May Butcher; The Linux Router Project; Jacopo Bassano; Football in Malta; Serphin Maltese; Sanctuary of Our Lady of Mellieħa; Central Semitic languages; Joe Borg; Beni Hassan; Mapping of Unicode characters; Agatha Barbara; Moroccan Arabic; Tory Reform Group

Cleanup: The Piper at the Gates of Dawn; Vagabond (person); Arab Christians
Merge: Primacy of the Roman Pontiff; Our Lady of Sorrows; Republic Day (Malta)
Add Sources: Nationalist Party (Malta); Maltese Calypso; Valletta
Wikify: J. Peter Grace; Double lift; Egberto Gismonti
Expand: Toledo, Spain; Public Broadcasting Services; Political geography

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the names of the Maltese village articles

There is currently an ongoing debate about whether the articles on Maltese villages should be given their English names. Kyarichy has already gone and renamed a bunch of articles such as as Kalkara citing these changes from an old obsolete paper and http://www.geody.com, even though these names are no longer in use.

The naming conventions clearly state that foreign location names commonly used in English should be used as the article names.

It would be appreciated if you could assist us in this discussion. ~ ► Wykebjs ◄ (userpage | talk) 10:59, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to your inquiry about the fish

Hi - sorry to get back to you a month later about your fish question (you asked me what kind of fish I caught as pictured on my user page). The fish is a Halibut. I'm not exactly sure how big it was but we guessed at about 80lbs. These fish are commonly caught in Alaskan waters and can grow to over 400lbs. They are extremely good white meat fish (as opposed to red meat salmon also caught in AK waters) and freeze well. We go every summer and bring back about three coolers of both halibut and salmon that we eat all year and share with family and friends. I took a lot of pictures this summer and will be hopefully improving the Wikiepdia page on Kodiak after they are uploaded and I have time to spend on the project. NancyHeise (talk) 04:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because someone has to appreciate all the good work you do, even if certain POV-pushers don't. ;) Good Work!

		The Geography Barnstar
		For all your tireless contributions to Malta-related articles. Wear this barnstar with pride. 89.243.42.136 (talk) 22:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sock-thing

Has there been a ploy to frame you? After this sock-circus I don't really know what to believe any more, it is so complex and tedious that I can't even be bothered to think about what the truth behind it may be. But I think the strongest reason that you were implicated was the fact that you had been banned asa result of your editing dispute with yolgnu immediately before the sockpuppets started to show up. This could be bad luck, it could be because the sockpuppeteers wanted to make you look bad or it could be because you are one of them. The doubt about which of these scanarios is true was the main reason you were implied in the checkuser I think, and the checkuser seems to have cleared you of the charges. However, the socks are quite easily recognizable normally since apparently all they do is troll and try to tie up other editors in disputes about seemingly insignificant details in the maltese related articles. I think probably the best way you can exonerate yourself is by maintaining an impeccable conduct - that is showing that you are not a troll by cooperating instead of obstructing colaboration since exactlu obstruction and disruption is the hallmark of this bunch of socks. Note that this is not an accusation of not having been cooperative in the past - but only a piece of advice that you can easily convince everyone that you are not a disruptive sock simply by not beginning to act like one. In fact I don't even care whether you are a sockpuppet or not as long as you don't cause disruption the way they did. Happy editing and don't worry about it.·Maunus·ƛ· 14:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Peter

Hello...I've been naughty and gone and removed the image you put on the Saint Peter article in favor of the previous one...I can't help but feel the one you uploaded was a bit too...arty. However I could be wrong, however if the current picture is no good in your opinion perhaps we could find a better one? Gavin (talk) 02:17, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I do identify more with the image you choose- however, the dark sky and his looking upwards into the distance sort of put me off...I thought, since most of these apostles have pictures where its usually just the Saint facing forward, Peter should be the same...I will go hunting for better quality stuff tho! :) Gavin (talk) 02:32, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any of these tickle your fancy?

In the mean time, I think we should go back to yours...your comment about sunburnt eyes just put me off the one I selected! Gavin (talk) 02:41, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, lets leave it for now and see if anyone stirs up...:) Gavin (talk) 02:56, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Carnivalhorse.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Carnivalhorse.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 STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 19:42, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Classical Arabic inscriptions

Hi Kalindoscopy. I was basing my edit on the information in the Pre-Islamic Arabic inscriptions article, which has a table that notes that there were a number of Arabic inscriptions made in the Arabic alphabet from the late 3rd to 4th century. This is confirmedhere where Kees Veerstegh writes on page 33, "There are, however, also a few pre-Islamic inscriptions in Arabic, in a script that may be called Arabic." The list he presents cites at least one from the 4th century. While there are older Arabic inscriptions (which he discusses in the pages before), they are in Aramaic or Nabataen scripts, een though in his opinion, they are Arabic. We should definitely cite this source, either in the intro beside the altered 4th century attestation, or somewhere in the body, if we want to go into greater detail. Howeer, in my opinion, it may be best to put the detail of the difference between Arabic in Arabic script and Arabic in Aramaic or Nabataen scripts in the Pre-Islamic Arabic inscriptions article itself. Tiamut^talk 14:17, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you would like to include that information in a footnote? I don't think we should ignore the mutliple inscriptions in Arabic and in Arabic alphabet letters that date to the 4th century. It's not just veerstegh who claims this (as you can on the Pre-Islamic Arabic inscriptions page). This source also discusses pre-Islamic poetry at length and says that while many of the poets work dates to the 6th century, there are some from earlier periods, such as the works of Abu Tammam (d. 231) and al-Buhturi (d. 284). We need to do more digging to be sure, but I think 6th century is far too late and een the 4th century is actually a little late by most scholars appraisals of the subject. Tiamut^talk 15:15, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See also, Byzantium and the Arabs in the ourth Century by Irfan Shahid which states: "If the beginnings of pre-Islamic Arabic poetry cannot be determined with accuracy, it can be safely assumed that the composition of Arabic poetry goes back to at least the fourth century AD." Tiamut^talk 15:19, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also see Bernard Lewis who writes of the Namarra inscription which he dates at 328 CE calling it the "oldest, surviVing inscription in the Arabic language". Tiamut^talk 15:23, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Analysis

Text:

I haven't found any reference to whether classical arabic replaced its pre-classical ancestor (with origins supposedly stretching back to the 4th Century CE) or existed alongside it.

All languages in their 'classical' form (usually 'classical' here means a subjective judgement on the best literary style in a language, i.e,. Athenian Greek as compared to other dialects, or Mycenaean, one of its ancestors) descend from an ancestral language, which they replace (as the English of Shakespeare and Johnson replaced Chaucer's, as Racine's replaced Villon's). They develop out of internal changes taking place within that ancestral language. Since a 'classical' language descends from an earlier pre-classical language, the former language parent is ipso facto dead, since it survives only in its classical form. Classical Arabic derived from a pre-classical form, which might also have generated other dialects in its branches of descent. If those 'cousin' descendants are more conservative than the classical form, preserving more archaic features, lost in the classical form, those dialects are not 'the pre-classical ancestor', but collateral affines contemporary with the major descendent, the one arbitrary history and literacy has accorded linguistic primogeniture to.

The notion of 'descent' from an ' ancestor' in linguistics was taken over from 19th.century Darwinianism. The metaphor carries with it the same implications of natural descent. If I descend from an ancestor I 'replace' him also because he is dead. If Shakespeare's language replaces Chaucer's, and we say Chaucer's English was the ancestor of the former, the implicit meaning is Chaucer's language was 'dead' (going the way of all ancestors) by Shakespeare and Bacon's day.

In that sense, a pre-classical language can no more exist side by side with the classical language that superceded it, than can a ancestral forebear exist side by side with his distant descendents. That is what I meant by logical implication. Sorry if this has led to any misunderstandings. I used Italian for discretionary reasons, and because, when I clicked I saw only Malta and Italian, and thought it discrete to phrase it in a private idiom you would be thoroughly familiar with. Perhaps indeed the point is trivial, but Eastern and Western Christianity split precisely over what, to us, seems trivialities of this linguistic order. In the area of wiki I specialise in, noticing small things about language is crucial for establishing NPOV. Regards Nishidani (talk) 21:33, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia cleanup

Hi Pietru, I'm trying to clean up our trivia, but it's an enormous task. Are you still interested? - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 04:51, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ha! Great! What I basically recommend is to pick a category and start working on all articles starting with a letter (e.g. all articles starting with E for June 2007), then do the following:

Merge any important, sourced and non-trivial information into the article itself.
Move any information that has no source and that isn't self-evident to the talk page, politely pointing out that information needs a source on Wikipedia (point to the policy) and that at any rate it doesn't seem to fit the definition of trivia (that is, unimportant info).
Remove any truly useless info - I should point out this can be controversial, it's usually best to try to merge in all info, but use your better discretion and judgement :-)

That's how I do it... one more note is, if you see an "In popular culture" section, that's not really "trivia", so feel free to remove the tag from these sections. To fix those sections requires another wikiproject for another day - I think our main problem at the moment is to clear the backlog of trivia first.

One last thing, if you get reverted and you want to revert back, that's OK, but make sure you ask why on the talk page and if the editor says why and it's reasonable then try to compromise in such a way that the material remains but no trivia sections is on the article :-)

There you go, lots of advise! My goal is to try to fix 10 articles or greater a day, though this is a private ambition - if you merged even 1 article a week then I would be very grateful :-) Also, if you know anyone else who could help, it would be great if you could ask them with the general advise I provided to you above - the more who work on this, the faster the backlog will be finished. Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 04:10, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Curtis

The Article Michael Curtis needs help, It is a stub and it needs a quality and importance assesment. Can you please help, --RayqayzaDialgaWeird2210 14:24, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maltese language

I have undone your revision. Your claim that the Maltese language article has "suffered enough" seems to be suggesting that both:

I am the cause of its suffering, and
I am causing it further suffering with my last revision.

This is a gross and unsubstantiated personal attack. I understand that the historical trouble of the article was to do with its potential status as a Mixed language/Creole language, but if you cared to check my edits, you would see I didn't edit anything to do with that. All I added was that French was one of the other languages from which it received loanwords, and that the input of these foreign inputs has been referred to by some linguists as a superstrate. Everything that I said was referenced, and all by reliable sources, some of which are even used elsewhere in the same article (and yes, for things other than its language family status), so if one is to object to the sources, much of the rest of the article's information, according to you, should also be removed.

May I ask you that next time you see me edit the article, you actually investigate the precise changes I made before jumping to conclusions. Additionally, I saw you claim on the talk page that you believed me to be one of the sockpuppets. While I will be the first to admit I am in online contact with them, I am certainly not one of them, and if you believe I am, you should file a checkuser request, or else stop attacking me.

Regards Mingeyqla (talk) 16:57, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maltese 2

Pietru, just calm down. We're working on the Maltese language page piece by piece. Please talk on the Talk page. So far I have asked some specific questions of those of you who are opposed to the added columns, which I find incredibly enlightening. Please respond without clicking the revert button. There is no consensus yet because the people who oppose the columns are not talking. You have violated 3RR right now, so I'd suggest you work with us and talk before hitting the revert button automatically. (Taivo (talk) 14:30, 18 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Taivo, this is totally ridiculous. I accept that we must discuss the issue, but then continuing to make edits related to it when the conversation is ongoing? Smacks of hypocrisy and worse. The new table that is taking shape deserves a place in the Siculo-Arabic article, I agree completely. But not on the Maltese article, which is there to show the relationship between the Maltese language and its ancestor. the roof of this court is too high to be yours (talk) 14:32, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pietru, you are not even close to breaking 3RR - while Taivo clearly is and has. And Taivo, I believe all the people opposing have repeatedly given reasons - you're just not listening to them. mɪn'dʒi:klə (talk) 15:11, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note, after I reported Taivo himself for 3RR, he has in fact withdrawn his report of you. mɪn'dʒi:klə (talk) 16:14, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Slavagg u boloh, kull wiehed minnhom. And it hardly bothers me anyway.. wara kollox, jekk qed tiehu ghalik sinjal li ghandek ghalfejn ux ^^ the roof of this court is too high to be yours (talk) 16:33, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because I figured out a compromise that solved the problem. Now the problem is you, Mingeyqla. (Taivo (talk) 16:24, 18 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Oh no you di'nt. No one has accepted your suggestion as it is certainly not a compromise. It is the same as before but in a modified table. You can put it on the varieties of arabic page, or the siculo-arabic page, but for the last time, it is not going to go on the Maltese one. mɪn'dʒi:klə (talk) 16:28, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is not the same chart. You didn't even read it or look at it. And since you ripped it off the page before anyone could actually look at it or discuss it, then it remains to be seen whether it is an acceptable compromise or not. (Taivo (talk) 16:31, 18 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Last comment here - give Pietru some respect. People are easily able to check the history of the page to see your table. mɪn'dʒi:klə (talk) 16:36, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No bickering here, thank you. the roof of this court is too high to be yours (talk) 16:33, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, Pietru. I would, however, like you to look at the compromise table I constructed and consider it. (Taivo (talk) 16:43, 18 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Maltese issues

Pietru, I'm glad that we could work out some things on the Maltese language page to everyone's (except perhaps Mingeyqla's) satisfaction. What I would like to know is exactly your point-of-view towards Maltese. This would help me in the future as I approach the article and other edits. My own point-of-view is as a linguist. I have a PhD in the subject and I specialize in historical linguistics and language change. I have very little patience for unscientific points-of-view and the facts of the issue are far more important than any nationalistic feelings to me. That's the angle I approach things from, not just in this article, but in life. I'm always willing to compromise, but never in an unscientific way. As I mentioned earlier, my writing is blunt, but please don't take that as disrespect towards you personally. And, as you saw on the Maltese language page, I don't always come up with compromises right away, but have to talk through the issues in an honest discussion. Don't be afraid to express your detailed opinions because it's those detailed opinions which help me understand what direction to go in an offered compromise. Cheers. (Taivo (talk) 19:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Re:Siculo-Arabic

I didn't think I had to add references since the rest of the words in the chart are not cited. I reverted back to remove my additions. --Falastine fee Qalby (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 00:52, 23 January 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Also, I really don't know how to go about about citing them, and it is really not a priority for me, so it is best to just revert back to what it was. --Falastine fee Qalby (talk) 01:00, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Malta

I see he has made many edits to Malta but of the ones I reviewed none seemed to be vandalism. If you can show me edits made by that IP that are nonconstructive, we can warn/ban him temporarily from further editing. GLaDOS (talk) 03:17, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I left a message on his talk page. You can feel free to do the same. I'd like to get some contact with him and If you can, bring the issue up with an admin. I have no problem helping out I'm just relatively new and trying to decide for myself what the best course of action is. GLaDOS (talk) 03:17, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pietru. You have new messages at Glane23's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Siculo-Arabic

Just thought to let you know that the Influence of Arabic on Sicilian article includes many of the words from the the Siculo-Arabic chart along with the Arabic counterparts, and a reference. The chart can be amended with that information. --Falastine fee Qalby (talk) 00:11, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maltese (dog)

Why are you not happy enough with the fact that the article is called Maltese, every one would conclude for them selves but most people decide on the topic in 5 seconds (simmilar to what they think about a person). I have nothing against Malta but in the case of this dog breed we cannot go in the direction you want. We simply cannot write the origin nor the patronage as "the Isle of Malta". I have suggested that if you want to include Malta in the patronage section that this would be original research. The order of mentioning the association with the dog's name is clearly listed in the standard. I do not see what is controversial to your POV because the Wikipedia is meant to include not to exclude facts. -- Imbris (talk) 01:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your reverting of my editing. You are very well aware that a dog breed with 8000 years of existance cannot be associated with one place only. It is associated to the name Maltese which can stand for three locations by the British in 1800's (mid century) this is the only reason the breed has the current name. I do not see why you cannot be happy with the article's title and the description of the article as it is after my editing. Malta has been mentioned the most and it would be nice if you can add the name of the Maltese in the Maltese language. Your accusations of nationalism are unfounded and harmful to our future colaboration on the editing of the article on the dog. -- Imbris (talk) 19:59, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are the only one whose edits can be characterized as you put it "nationalistic". Your tactics of insisting that the Isle of Malta would be first and foremost on the list is what is unfounded by any account. I have not deleted any valuable content but instead added sourced content that you keep deleting. Constructive, yeah man, but you are the one who is not constructive at this moment. I will not accept your deletion of sources nor the deletion of the order of "name association" as set by the standard. -- Imbris (talk) 20:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not aggresive but an editor who uses sources and facts, I have not removed anything of matter from the article. Your translation of the name Issa for a Roman Governor's dog to modern Maltese language is what I have removed and will remove in the future. The fragment of a song about Issa is not neccesary but should be in Wikisource, not Wikipedia. Your omitting the Greek sources is what is problematic. Now how is the Maltese (dog) called in the Maltese language? If you want constructive approach start using it yourself. I am all for it. -- Imbris (talk) 20:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First of all I will say that I won't get provocked by you and your accusations. I have learned a thing or two on this Wikipedia. I have not POV pushed anything.

What do you really want from this article?

Country of origin doesn't really exist - hence using the standard's naming - it is Central Mediteraneean Area which could be shortened to Central Mediteraneean
Patronage Italy but if you want original research so much write Croatia, Malta, Italy and wait for a Italian to come by and change it to a most NPOV e. g. Italy.
Alphabet, the English language uses the order of letters 94% like the Roman alphabet, thus the order of countries should be Croatia, Malta, Italy
Other names I am all for inclusion of the main other names in the main pretender to patronage countries, Croatia, Malta and Italy
The order of mentioning the name associations should be as the standard suggests. The standars were made by experts from FCI and should be used in encyclopaedias as a relevant source. If you want to change the order of name associations take it to court with them (F. C. I.). Also it would be a show of good faith to use that order of appearance of name associations because this way we would compromise on not to include that first sentence from the description that is present in the standard (No. 65). You know what that sentence would mean if published.
Maltese as a name was standardized in Great Britain and is obviously connected with the fact that Great Britain shares a great deal of history with the Maltese islanders. This should satisfy your nationalistic POV to a great deal and you should be happy that the name of the article is the Maltese.
Greek sources should be emphasised to a more level of comprehension because without them we do not have a complete picture
Issa - the name of the Roman Governor should not be translated to the modern Maltese language

Now talk and say what do you mind about this approach, also what is the current name for the Maltese (dog) in the Maltese language? Or you cannot be constructive even on that little topic of the expertise of the Maltese language native speaker.

Imbris (talk) 20:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who ever said that Issa was the name of the Roman Governor?

I most certainly have not. Issa was the name of his dog. Issa in Latin means something, I will look it up in my dictionary. Issa was the Greek and Roman name of the island of Vis. What matters is what it meant to Publius. Did it mean Now as in current Maltese language? It did not mean Now, most certainly not. Please stop derogating this discussion into accusations and defamating of other editors as ignorant. -- Imbris (talk) 21:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are not being constructive and I find that your approach of not discussing is harmful to further editing. Have you anything to say about the merit of our discussion? Why don't you want to colaborate with me and tell me how the Maltese (the dog) is known in the Maltese language? -- Imbris (talk) 22:01, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

thanks for correcting thats error, but I think same pronounciation meaning OLIVE no ? but here in morocco we speak Amazigh majoritary. 41.249.65.3 (talk) 22:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed.

Malta is behind all security of Europe, if Maltese were'nt here ottomans would control now Europe, Maltese are a big heroes that deffend millions of people living today in all corners of Westeren Europe, Its a free Heroic act from thos remarkable people. thank you 41.249.65.3 (talk) 23:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey friend.

you can bring your msn, I would know more than what is publicated in a free encyclopedia. thank you41.249.65.3 (talk) 23:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

You did'nt give me your msn, mate. thank you 41.249.65.3 (talk) 23:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit comments

I'm struggling to see [7] as reverting vandalism, or worse. Please be more careful in your language. Had the page not been protected, I would have blocked you for violating WP:3RR William M. Connolley (talk) 20:52, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you keep insisting on Publius/Martial right after the completely POV statement?

Also the order of Maltese language first is not a good way of doing anything, what is your source for that name anyway.

Publius/Martial should go into trivia and not into history. If you insist it shall stay in history but not right after the POV statements.

Also wikifying the Malta and the Mediterranean Sea twice in the article but not other places it complete POV.

Imbris (talk) 23:22, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Placement

Why are you changing the order of placement of certain statements in the history section of the article on Maltese (dog)?

The order has been given by previous editors.

First we describe the name, then we use historical quotations then we make general statements about the fact previously given.

Have you not seen that I have placed the Publius/Martial "stuff" after Pliny the Elder. This is the course of history as we have been taught (first oldest, second old, third recent). The statement for which we all know is pure POV (the one about general association of the dog's name) cannot go with the Publius/Martial references.

Also the sentence about how Italians called the dog cannot go after the history section, it should be with the "name" section of the history section.

Imbris (talk) 23:17, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recent correction in Augustine of Hippo by 122.54.149.51 - Statements on Jews

Hi Pietru il-Boqli, I have a question in regard to the contribution of 122.54.149.51 this morning in: Augustine of Hippo [1]. I would like to talk with the contributor about this very delicate question how Augustine viewed and positioned the Jewish people. As you know, this is actually one of the most controversial issues within Augustine's opus and cannot just be changed with one word. Unfortunately the contributor doesn't have the courage and/or purposefully doesn't want to open his/her talk page but prefers to change content "unseen" and without the possibility of discourse. If I understand the text citation correctly (City of God, book 18, chapter 46) Augustine did not intend to say that the Jewish people is God's - "his" people, that way logically pointing to the church as not being his people. In so far I would very much give the advice to go back to the revision as of 19:54, 12 February 2009, saying: "God had chosen the Jews as a special people". I believe that this would more accurately present Augustine's view. What can we do? I have sent the above also to Carl Bunderson. --Inawe _talk 15:36, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the broken link. I had that one in mind: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Augustine_of_Hippo&diff=prev&oldid=271085874 . --Inawe _talk 15:43, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maltese (dog)

Hi,

I'm not very familiar with the subject area of dispute, or the dispute itself. Can you ask User:Scientizzle, the guy who protected it previously, to give it a look instead? I think he will understand what's going on better than me. bibliomaniac 1 5 01:25, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

February 2009

You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule at Maltese (dog). Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. Kevin (talk) 01:41, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

This block comes as a result of protecting the article from another user's nationalistically based editing (Maltese (dog)

Decline reason:

I am responding not to the request above but your comment below: "I don't think I entered into any sort of reverting war; in fact I left messages for various admins and for article protection before resorting to edits." Lack of swift administrative response is not a reason to WP:IAR. Daniel Case (talk) 03:33, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Even if that is so, protecting by edit warring is not acceptable. Kevin (talk) 02:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I don't think I entered into any sort of reverting war; in fact I left messages for various admins and for article protection before resorting to edits. 汚い危険きつい (talk) 02:34, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

My edits were purely constructive and my distrust of Imbris' (the conflicting editor also involved on the Maltese (dog) article) edits have been confirmed in various others' reverts over his work.

Decline reason:

[8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]. Those edits look like edit warring to me. I understand that your intentions may have been good, but the way you went about it was not. Tiptoety ^talk 04:34, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Blocked, or, Why Wikipeda is full of Sycophants

This edit is a gross personal attack.

Given that this was not an isolated incident, I have blocked you for 1 week. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 07:29, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The comment was/is entirely justified; the obscene answer it got simply proves what sort of an individual the editor is. Also, the fact this block has occurred is further proof of just what a mess Wikipedia is in, full of self-servers and back-scratchers. TenofAllTrades, you are proof of this. Shame. 汚い危険きつい (talk) 08:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

This block is scandalous. The supposed 'harassment' is plainly evident by any overview of the editor's history. He is a racist/anti-semite and to proclaim so is truth telling, not slander. The fact this block has been leveled is deeply worrying and grossly unfair.

Decline reason:

Absolutely not. Your edits since being blocked are only justifying the block even more. Any further soapboxing will lead to you being denied access to this page also. Kevin (talk) 08:36, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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).

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

Request reason:

The incompetence of admins currently involved is entirely regrettable. My previous comments regarding the complete denial of the editor's racist tone remain.

Decline reason:

Kevin's previous unblock denial pretty much said it. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 08:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Pointing out the self-evident, in a spirit of encouraging improvement, is not suitable grounds for blocking. If this is somehow the case, Wikipedia bureaucracy has achieved new levels of decadence. I did nothing block-worthy.

Decline reason:

Your ability to edit your talk page has been suspended due to repeated abuse of the unblock template, and continued personal attacks. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 09:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Replaceable fair use Image:Hagarqim_aerial.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Hagarqim_aerial.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 14:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well

Well of course the arabs control over malta does connect with my articles information.

When a group of people take over an area of land, almost always, the new group of people leave some type of mark on the old people, such as names.

There is no better way to explain having maltese friends and family with the same exact surnames that arabs have. Anyway, i'll definitly find other sources. it shouldn't be hard at all since its so common, but it's getting late now, so i'm about to go to sleep.

also, what did you say in maltese about "Ethnic Groups"? Sadly, i don't know maltese language.

( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonsaysabc123 (talk • contribs) 06:35, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Malta

Thanks for the kind words Pietru. I was on Malta a couple of years ago for a conference and stayed for a couple extra days of touristing. In the process, I collected a couple of brochures on Fort Rissoli (sp?), and got interested in Hamrija, the Congreve memorial, and Hagar Qim. SO when I got back I decided to do a little editing. As you know, one thing leads to another as you do a little research, create links, create back links, see a paragraph that really could do with a little fixing, etc. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 21:52, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Elsa schiaparelli 1949 collection.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Elsa schiaparelli 1949 collection.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) 05:46, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

reply

Hello, Pietru. You have new messages at Ched Davis's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi

Hi Pietru, I did review the article, and made some changes as I was going along. I left some info that may be helpful on the article talk page. Just curious, how did you happen to come upon my name to review the article? I enjoy doing that - but just wondered. Happy Editing. — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 05:36, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see discussion on Talk:Elsa Schiaparelli

Thanks. Hopefully we can come to some agreement. Mabalu (talk) 16:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Hagar Qim

Hi Pietru. Yes, I will do my best to improve the Hagar Qim article. "Excavation section is pretty poor": do you need more information? BTW I've noticed that your are really working hard in improving articles related to the prehistory of Malta and the Maltese language. You're doing a really good job. Keep it up. Cheers Ramif 47 (talk) 19:42, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hi!

i'm not targetting articles. i live in mcihigan. there are a lot of maltese here. u know how the list of languages said english, maltese, and italian? well it was missing one, arabic!!!

Maltese people always go to arab stores or events and speak arabic. it's fact... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonsaysabc123 (talk • contribs) 22:15, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am very sad to have to tell you that you are incorrect. Maybe you should come to Michigan. There is a lot of maltese people here. me and my family are maltese and we have so many maltese friends here. Actually, michigan has the highest maltese and arab populatiosn in the united states.

And also, please let me reming you that siculo arabic IS arabic. it simply has a diferent dialect. for instance in the united states, we all speak english but if you go to the south they will ahev a different DIALECT than people in the north, but they still speak english. The same goes for siculo arabic. it is still arabic.

Make sure from now on when you edit articles, keep your prejudices aside since they ultimatley become a person's fall.

And also, then why would italian be listed on the wikipage?

let me remnd you almsot 50 percent of the maltese language is arabic. yes ARABIC.

Do u want to know how to heck? simply, open up your prejudice mind, and go online to a arabic dictionary, liek one u would find in a country such as iraq, or lebanon, or anywhere that speaks arabic.

then find a maltese dictionary. look up a word that you believe is from "siculo-arabic" and then look up that same word in the arabic dictionary.

You won't believe what you will find. You will find that they are the same words!!!!

Dear Jesus, how is this possible? becuase siculo arabic is still arabic, but it has a different dialect. like in the united states, peopel in the nroth states say you all while people in the south say ya'll... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonsaysabc123 (talk • contribs) 22:37, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

this is very sad.

i am not syaing amltese people are arabs, becuase they are not, maltese peole are european.

but arabic is definitley apparent.

My aunt just moved here from malta. she went to mcdonalds with her husband and began speaking the maltese language in fornt of the cashier.

the cashier was an arab from iraq, and he understood everything she had said to her husband so the cashier began to speak to her in arabic.

How is it possible for an arab in iraq to understand a maltese person straight from malta?

This is why people liek you make the earth a horrid place. your mind is closed and understands only what you want to believe.

And also, why is it you pounce on any maltese article on wikipeida?

Are you the matltese king? do you rule over the 400 people taht live on the island and speak the maltese language that is losing appeal and being taken over by english. (many believe maltese is going down the extinction path like irish becuase english is taking over).

Make sure you keep an opne mind or dont contribute to the public.

I used to be proud to tell peopel i was maltese, but after talking to you, i might just start to say i'm an american. it is definitly better than being linked to soemone like you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonsaysabc123 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i am more maltese than you will ever be.

and when i said malta had 400 people, i knew it had more but it's so small no one really cares about it!!

and my aunt was speaking the exact same maltese language(that is becoming extinct) that you use right now with your own family. the arab man understood her because almost 50 percent of the maltese langauge is arabic. the other 50 is mostly italian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonsaysabc123 (talk • contribs) 23:09, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i dotn have to be able to read a language that's on the brink of extinction. i need to have a HEART and MIND to be maltese, which you are not.

Arabic dog= kalb Maltese dog= kalb

Arabic apple= tuffeha Maltese apple= tuffieha

Arabic pig= hinzir Maltese pig= hanzir

Arabic book= kiteb Maltese book= ktieb

Arabic red= ahmar Maltese red= ahmar

Arabic yellow= isfar Maltese yellow= isfar

Arabic cow= baqara Maltese cow= baqra

For God's sake! You must be an idiot to not see how they connect.

Even words that are itialina take a more rough sound in maltese. My parents listen to maltese radio online all the time and it sounds just like an arab speaking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonsaysabc123 (talk • contribs) 23:26, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i already know italian was an official lngauge. my parents have told me all of that stuff.

but arabic was in malta for hundreds of years also, and left a mark on malta, maybe a bad one, or maybe a good one.

Also, how are u able to find out it's me making those changes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonsaysabc123 (talk • contribs) 23:32, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

okay thanks.

and 200 years is a very long time...

and i will continue to edit pages i wish with facts becuase they are facts.

thank u Pietru. it was nice talking to you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonsaysabc123 (talk • contribs) 23:39, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

actaully 200 years is a very long time.

6 millions jews were killed n about 5 years.
God created the world in 7 days.
America was founded and colonized in a couple years.

In 200 years, if the arabs wanted to be evil, they could have slaughtered every maltese person, but they were very nice instead.

And believe me, i know how this website works, and God knows what facts are facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonsaysabc123 (talk • contribs) 23:52, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ħaġar Qim

Profuse apologies, I replied to your message days ago, but must have pressed preview instead of save, as I've just noticed it's not there. I have now repleid properly on my page. Giano (talk) 10:06, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]