User talk:Truth777333

Truth777333, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Truth777333! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Doctree (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:40, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Noticeboard

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. ShawntheGod (talk) 10:27, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

January 2014

Hello, I'm Jim1138. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Moors with this edit that didn't seem very civil, so I removed it. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it’s one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Jim1138 (talk) 10:34, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 11:00, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on other people again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. If you continue to call editors racists or white supremacists in the way you have done recently I will probably block you. Dougweller (talk) 15:25, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Closed discussions

Please don't edit closed discussions. Also please note that ANI is a venue for asking Administrators to take action, for instance to block an editor. It is not appropriate for content disputes. Dougweller (talk) 16:29, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Olmec head.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Olmec head.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:36, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

van Sertima

Your recent edit there did not represent what the source said. What the article says must faithfully represent the source, not soften it. Dougweller (talk) 22:07, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(Truth777333 (talk) 22:20, 4 February 2014 (UTC)). I have seen plenty of edits that use the exact wording " softens the language" This current article is very biased and reflects badly on the works of Dr. Ivan Van Sertima. It is supposed to reflect a neutral view and yet everything of mention is negative. The area to which mended is already mentioned in the paragraph below. I would be happy deleting it altogther from the first paragraph.(Truth777333 (talk) 22:20, 4 February 2014 (UTC)).[reply]

The difference that the language in question was what the source used - you can't change that. Dougweller (talk) 15:08, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(Truth777333 (talk) 15:41, 5 February 2014 (UTC))Calrence Weiant has a PHD in archeology. Who are you to suggest that he isnt a reliable source for teh Ivan van Sertima article. He worked with Mr. Sertima for many years. he is a very reputable source.(Truth777333 (talk) 15:41, 5 February 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Huh? He's mentioned in the article, I haven't removed him. Have you even read the whole article? He doesn't belong in the lead however. But he is not a reliable source for Olmec heads, he was a ceramic specialist but better known for his psychic archaeology, and most of his career he was a chiropractor. If you think he is, take it to WP:RSN. He probably doesn't belong in the article at all, maybe I should go to RSN. But he certainly should not be in the article twice. Dougweller (talk) 17:03, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The other point is that he is best known for his Olmec alternative origin speculations, and we have to make it clear in the lead that this is not accepted by mainstream specialists. That's policy. Dougweller (talk) 17:05, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree that this information has to be in the article twice. What is the next step for compromise . All other articles that I see where the person is known for a particular controversial theory is not necessarily listed in the lead and therefore don't seem to follow this premise. He is known for other things as well not just the Olmec alternative. You are obviously making this a bigger deal than it needs to be. If this information is already in the article , I am not in agreement to have it also in the lead. I would like this to go to other administrators as you seem very biased on this issue and have not been willing to compromise at all.(Truth777333 (talk) 08:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC)) By the way, that was the mainstream thought many years ago. Since then there has been documented evidence that Blacks were in fact the first people in America. http://news.softpedia.com/news/The-First-Inhabitants-of-the-Americans-Were-Black-64307.shtmlThe first migration wave is believed to have arrived approximately 14 thousand years ago and had been comprised of individuals resembling Luzia, with non-mongoloid morphology, similar to that of the current Australians and Africans. http://revistapesquisa.fapesp.br/en/2012/05/06/walter-neves-luzias-father/. Check it out for yourself. Therefore your insistence on labeling Ivan Van Sertima as not accepted by mainstream only indicates that the mainstream scholars of that time were incorrect. New evidence has proven these scholars which you cite in the article as wrong nevertheless. It is absolutely not necessary and I insist that this information is removed from the lead as it creates a distorted unbalanced picture of how his works were received. (Truth777333 (talk) 08:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Softpedia is not a reliable source by our criteria, you need peer reviewed journals or academic books - the term "Black Asians" exists but is not used to refer to any group 12000 years ago. Most scientists think we all come originally from Africa. In any case, this is not what van Sertima is arguing. He is arguing that Africans visited the Americas far more recently than that, within historical times, he was not suggesting that Native Americans came from Africa. Neves is not arguing that Africans migrated to the Americas. No mainstream scholar suggests that. Dougweller (talk) 13:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(Truth777333 (talk) 14:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)) My point is that the mainstream scholars also said that there were no artifacts of proof that a non - native american race ever existed in america. This is teh aspect of teh critism which I intend to dispute. We now know that view is incorrect. We have skulls to proove it. In addition to drawings and artificats. I wont argue anymore about this like I said before, I will simply provide sources. Dr. Imonhoteps book "First americans were african" contains 7 peer reviews . As you stated , peer reviews are reliable sources correct? I will provide you with this.(Truth777333 (talk) 14:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC))[reply]

February 2014

Hello Truth777333, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your addition to Ivan van Sertima has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and a cited source. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied without attribution. If you want to copy from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 15:09, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Truth777333, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your addition to Yosef Ben-Jochannan has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and a cited source. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied without attribution. If you want to copy from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 06:50, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that if you continue to insert material that violates our copyright policy you are likely to be blocked (although I won't do it, I'll just take you to WP:ANI. Dougweller (talk) 06:53, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]