Garzo

---

Welcome to my discussion page. Please post new messages to the bottom of the page and use headings when starting new discussion topics.
Please also sign and date your entries by inserting — ~~~~ at the end. Thank you.
Start a new discussion topic.

---

Old discussion topics can be found in the archive.

---

Random Aramaic/Syriac-related questions

Hey Garzo,

1. Are Syame ever used for verbs or are they only restricted to certain nouns?
2. How is one to properly transliterate foreign words/names? Is there a set standard? So far, if the name is the same in Arabic and Hebrew then I translate it to coincide with those two (e.g. "Michigan" becomes ܡܝܫܝܓܢ/מישיגן/ميشيغان, even though a closer spelling is probably ܡܫܓܢ). If they don't coincide, then I just make one that matches the original pronunciation as phonetically as possible. This is mainly concerning t, k, and long a sounds. Do I use taw or teth, kaph or qoph, or an aleph in the middle of a word even though a glottal stop is not present? Arabic usually seems to use ta for Ts and kaf for Ks, while Hebrew uses teth for Ts, qoph for Ks, and aleph for long As (like Arabic).

I'm starting to see evidence leaning towards a Hebrew-like system, as in "ܐܓܘܣܛܘܣ" instead of "ܐܓܘܣܬܘܣ" and "ܐܘܩܝܐܢܘܣ"/"ܐܘܩܝܢܘܣ" instead of "ܐܘܟܝܢܘܣ." Any ideas? --334 02:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Although syāmē are sometimes misused, their use is quite straightforward. They are the sign of the plural used to mark all plural nouns. They are used to mark all plural adjectives, including participles, except the masculine absolute plural (e.g. ܛܒܝܢ) which always lacks syāmē. They are only used to mark certain feminine plural verbs: in the perfect, for the 3rd-person feminine plural, and in the imperfect for both the 2nd- and 3rd-person feminine plural. Prepositions that take plural form (e.g. ܒܝܢ̈ܝ) take syāmē. They are also used to mark the number 2 and feminine 'teen' numerals. The general rule, although it doesn't cover all of these, is that syāmē are used where the word form is identical to another, non-plural form.

When transliterating non-Syriac words into Syriac script there are some general rules of thumb. The tradition is to render the Arabic ض with the Syriac ܨ, and the Arabic ظ with the Syriac ܛ. In garshuni, these are marked with a dot to show they are to be given their Arabic value. A large number of Greek words have been transliterated into Syriac because of the historical importance of Greek. There are quite a few books written about the intricacies of translation from Greek into Syriac. Generally, all vowels are represented; so, 'a' is represented by ܐ, 'e' by either ܐ, ܝ or both, 'i' by ܝ, 'o' by ܘ (or ܐ by West Syriacs) and 'u' by ܘ. The sounds 'k' and 't' are usually represented by ܩ and ܛ respectively (because ܟ and ܬ were used to represent the Greek χ and θ). You'll find that Arabic and Hebrew transliterations are fairly similar in this regard, and are perhaps the best guide. — Gareth Hughes 13:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Garzo, much appreciated. --334 01:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

---

Garzo, can you tell me exactly which Greek vowels translate to the Syriac letters you mentioned? Is this correct?:

• Αα=ܐ
• Εε=ܝ/ܐ
• Ηη=ܝ
• Οο/Ωω=ܘ/ܐ
• Υυ=ܘ

I'm assuming this system is also in place for other (mainly European) languages, but I'm having trouble believing all vowels are represented. "Canada" in Hebrew is "קנדה," not "קאנאדה." Can you explain this to me?

Also, when transliterating from Arabic, is it proper to include aleph wherever alif is in the Arabic word? For example, would إسلام be ܐܣܠܡ or ܐܣܠܐܡ?

--334 14:14, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Part of the problem here is that there's no set system for transliterating into Syriac: for example, I've seen a Greek word transliterated two different ways in the same passage before. There is a difference between western and eastern pronunciation that affects transliteration, but older documents show that the eastern pronunciation is closer in many ways to the system of transliteration before the community's division. The chart you give above is just about right, but often short vowels (α, ε, ο and υ) in unaccented syllables are left unrepresented in transliteration. The digraph ου represents the pure vowel /u/ in Greek and is almost always represented by ܘ in Syriac.

Arabic almost always uses an alif when it wants to mark ā. Both Hebrew and Syriac only really care to mark ā at the end of a word with ה and ܐ respectively. In Hebrew orthography, it seems far less acceptable to mark a word-medial ā with a mater lectionis (perhaps because of the choice of ה: it has more 'consonantal quality' than א) than it is in Syriac. In foreign words transliterated into Syriac, there is a tendency to mark most occurrences of a with ܐ so that the reader pronounces it correctly. Now, in the case of 'Canada', there are three a vowels. The Hebrew קנדה only shows the final vowel because that's the only one its orthography can confidently mark. In Syriac, one could write ܩܐܢܐܕܐ, but I would be tempted to write ܩܐܢܕܐ, leaving the second vowel unwritten. That's just a gut feeling: the second vowel is unstressed, so I don't feel it needs an ܐ. However, the three-alaf spelling is probably more clear, and readers are less likely to try to make a Syriac word out of it.

When transliterating Arabic, I would be tempted to render it letter for letter, and so render all ا with ܐ. Apart from that, use ܔ for ج, and ܨ (perhaps with a dot above it) for ض, and ܛ (perhaps with a dot in its loop) for ظ. There are various, though somewhat conflicting, schemes for representing other sounds (mostly those present in Persian, Turkish and Kurdish) that could be used. — Gareth Hughes 15:54, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I think I understand now. Thanks again! --334 19:38, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Time_Ambassador_Franks.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Time_Ambassador_Franks.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Abu badali ^(talk) 21:30, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Please delete it. — Gareth Hughes 22:13, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Yoghurt

I want to start out by saying I'm really sorry that this happened - I did my best to stop it (since the discussion has happened so many times), but sadly I have been overruled by 4 people who are obsessed with name changing (regardless of whether or not I agree with them). There is a new debate on the Yoghurt talk page about the move - I just felt it would be best if most people who had voted in the past knew about this.danielfolsom 00:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Wycliffe

Hi Gareth. Just to let you know I removed your comments on the current controversy at Wycliffe. In my judgement they went beyond what the Guardian article said -maybe coloured by inside knowledge? It is perhaps the case that we do need to have something on the controversy if it is bigger than the usual spats that go with institutional change so would be happy to discuss this with you. I guess there are double questions for me and you -firstly the desire for a good comprehensive article. Secondly what is best from a Christian point of view in terms of allowing Wycliffe to resolve the issues. I'm not sure that I would want some of the personal stuff in the Guardian propogated against my college principal if he was involved in controversy. Best Wishes (Be Dave 20:49, 16 May 2007 (UTC))

Syriac

Garzo,

I just wanted to respond to your email about Gorgias Press, and assure you that I don't intend to abuse the priviledge of editing or use it for advertising. I checked out your personal page, and as a fellow Anglican, I was pleased to see that you are so involved with Wikipedia. I am an academic of sorts, Ph.D. at Edinburgh in Ancient Near East, and I edit Wikipedia pages as time permits. When I know sources outside Gorgias titles, I add those too. In my teaching career I was one of those profs who advocated Wikipedia use, when, as always, compared to other sources. One of the best things going on the pages is the bibliographic material, so I would like to try to beef that up where and when I can. Cheers, Sawiggins 17:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)Sawiggins 5/18/07

Diyarbakır

Please do not turn Diyarbakır (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) into a revert war. You have clearly demonstrated an angry editing style on Turkish articles in the past. Please use the articles discussion page if you have objections. I was reverting to an older, agreed wording that had just been removed. I object to your calling this soapboxing. — Gareth Hughes 16:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

The sources you have provided ([1], [2], [3]) do not fall under what we consider as a reliable source. While Britannica is reliable, it makes no mention of the capital claim [4]. -- Cat ^chi? 16:19, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

• Dear Garzo, you are one of the member of revert war in Diyarbakır article. Last revert was made by you (majorly a blind revert) just immediately before protected by you. Just this transaction alone, can be accepted as "abuse of admin rights". Please look for a better solution.Regards.Must.^{T C} 05:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I simply reverted back to the original version as you continued to edit without discussion. I note that you haven't brought anything new to the talk page, so I'm sorry I've taken away what you feel to be your right to dictate the contents of the article. Listen to and work with others and you get some input, ignore others and you don't. — Gareth Hughes 07:46, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Something is wrong with my edits.Please take a look at articles talk page for my comments.Regards.Must.^{T C} 07:50, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I condsider these edits of yours — [5][6] — not to have been discussed, and to have been simple restatements of your first edit. See the discussion page, as I have proposed a compromise. All I see you doing is stating your right to have it the way you want. — Gareth Hughes 07:59, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Monotheism

"Hindu views on monotheism" was mentioned in the text as a main art for the Hinduism section. We don't have to link it twice. Aminullah 16:53, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Alqosh Article

Hello, I saw your note on Alqosh's discussion page and I was wondering if you can resolve a problem we are having. Both my parents are from Alqosh. We (as the people of Alqosh) are all known to be Chaldean, no one of us calls themselves Assyrian. However, Chaldean keeps on arguing and editing the page for it to match his ethnic background (Assyrain). I don't have time to edit it back every time he edits it because I really don't have time for games and also that is not the way to go about doing things. I'm asking for you to look at the sources that I posted on Alqosh's discussion page that clearly state it is a Chaldean town. Also, check the history edit on the page, you will see numerous amounts of people who have tried to edit the page to say Chaldean but it's always the same person who is changing it to Assyrian. I really don't have much time to waste since I'm studying for my MCAT, I would appreciate it if you resolve the problem accordingly. Thank you...

Karam Bollis 16:02, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Chaldean has been pushing the Assyrianist possition for a long while. These are names are labels, they do not correspond to any agreed substance. The Christians of Alqosh are traditionally members of Chaldaean Catholic Church, and experienced a quite different history from the Christians of the Hakkari mountains who first adopted the name 'Assyrian'. Many members of the Chaldaean Church have chosen to use the name 'Assyrian' too, but not all. There can be no definitive answer to the question. The problem is that no one in the community reads, or is able to read, the mediaeval, and earlier, documents of the Christians of the region, which do not use either title for the people. — Gareth Hughes 22:57, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Well you refuse to accept Suraya (Syrian) is Assyrian as Spartan is Greek, so your above opinion is totally misleading. Suraya was never always meant Christian, since the Aramaic word for that has always been Meshihaye. I have explained the situation of Alqosh; it is one of the few Chaldean villages that are a strong supporter of the Assyrian idenity. Do you see [these Alqoshnaye teens?] Do you see what flag they are holding? Yes they are Chaldean-rite and proud of it. Chaldean 23:19, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

First of all Suraya is a corrupt spelling of Suryāyā, the latter appearing frequently in early documents. I never said anything about the word meaning only 'Christian'. I never suggested that Alqosh Christians don't call themselves 'Assyrian'. If you read what I said, you'll see that I said "Many members of the Chaldaean Church have chosen to use the name 'Assyrian' too, but not all" — it's up there in black and white. So, you have just called me 'misleading' without reading what I have written. Once again you have misrepresented me. All of your references are to modern politics again. This is because you cannot find sufficient evidence for use of 'Assyrian' for the people before the 19th century. Feel free to rant some more below, but, without evidence, it's hot air. — Gareth Hughes 23:43, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Your stubborn mind has already made up its conclusion. What is the point of debating with you? Chaldean 01:40, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Again, full of vitriol, but absolutely no content. My mind is made up by the evidence rather than community politics. Look, here's another user who whole-heartedly and sincerely holds to a different political view. I do not hold to view that whoever shouts the loudest is right. — Gareth Hughes 07:52, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Chaldean you're stubborn. I posted two links proving we are Chaldean. Honestly, I take it as an insult being called an Assyrian. So leave the article Alqosh alone, honestly you seem like an old person, why don't you start acting like it. Karam Bollis 15:42, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration

An arbitration case involving you has been filed. Feel free to comment there. Thank you. -- Cat ^chi? 23:45, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Editwar

Dear Garzo, whould you please check this history. On my Opinion it is an Editwar. --Bohater 01:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

You should take it to WP:3RR. I'm not going to rise to it. — Gareth Hughes 01:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:User-Garzo-topper.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:User-Garzo-topper.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 22:03, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Mandaic

Sorry I think I made a mistake! Please feel free to revert my edit. I fact I didn't notice the difference between Modern and Classical Mandaic .In southern Iraq Mandaic is used only as a liturgical language and according to my knowledge only certain class in the Mandaic society can speak it (people from that class do not get married from the other class/es in the Mandaic society). Since Mandaic is a Semitic language and very close to Arabic compared to other languages Modern Mandaeans speak Arabic in their daily life. I think this website is usefull for you if you can understand Arabic [7](you can read the English section but I think the Arabic section has got more information). And this article is written by a Mandaic researcher about the roots of Mandaic language [8]. Best regards--Aziz1005 14:42, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it looks like, after skimming through the Arabic of the Mandaean Union site, that it is mostly dealing with the classical, liturgical language, and that Iraqi Mandaeans speak Arabic. Modern Mandaic is quite distinct from the classical language, and is only spoken by a handful of Mandaeans around Ahvaz. There have been occaisional reports of Neo-Mandiac speakers in the US, but that all seems to be hearsay. I'll try to refactor the article so that it's clear that the article deals with two related but different languages, and note where each is spoken. Thanks. — Gareth Hughes 15:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

anti-vandalism

top work on repairing the Everton FC page RoyalBlueStuey 15:02, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. — Gareth Hughes 15:05, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Armenian language page

Please reply my message in the talk, Thank you. 75.28.37.201 00:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Reporting

you are free to report. You can go ahead.Must.^{T C} 18:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

This user has indeed had a string of vandalisms on Armenian and Greek related articles, removing references to genocide. I will post on the notice board on this character.

In the meantime, I am wondering if you can protect and mediate the Church of Kish page, as though I feel I am being unfairly treated by the gang there. I would appreciate your time greatly. Sincerely, Hetoum I 01:32, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup

Would you be specific about the 'cleanup' of the Imette St. Guillen reference? I was in the process of editing that page when I saw your post. - MurderWatcher1 on Friday, June 8, 2007 4:43 p.m. EST.

It quite clearly needs to be conformed to general Wikipedia standards. For starters, only the article title on its first mention should be bold. See WP:MOS for details. — Gareth Hughes 20:46, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

well

Thank you for warning me but its my page so ill do as i wish with it. Ill leave the stuff thats on here but dont EVER threaten me again.TheManWhoLaughs 17:57, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

No, policy says [official warnings from user talk pages is deprecated]: don't do it. I'm not threatening you, I'm warning you. You'll get a final warning. If you continue I shall block you for 24 hours. If you return to the same behaviour pattern you get a longer block. It'll happen so start being nice to other users and respecting the rules. — Gareth Hughes 18:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hello, I was looking up at the wiki page on my school, which is wierd, and I saw what I think was vandalism. On the page John Paul II Catholic High School and I though I saw some vandalism. Under the mission statement it says:

It is the mission of John Paul II Catholic High to provide an affordable kindergarten curriculum within a Christ-centered Catholic environment. This mission encompasses the education of the whole person--spirit, mind, and body--but in reality fails to give respect to its own students.

When in reality, the mission statement is:

It is the mission of John Paul II Catholic High to provide an affordable college preparatory curriculum within a Christ-centered Catholic environment. This mission encompasses the education of the whole person--spirit, mind, and body--within the tradition of the Catholic Church.

It seems the ip who edited this is 68.84.30.147. I have reverted the vandalism, but I ask that you block the ip. Thank you Sith Penguin Lord 23:40, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Maronite

Hi Garzo. Yes this material was on another page, "Maronite people". Thanks. Nochi 05:58, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Maronite people (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) was created on 11 June. I'll fix its spelling mistakes. — Gareth Hughes 11:19, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Possible Further Vandalism

Hello again. I'm still learning Wikipedia and am learning from the edits that ImmortalGoddezz has performed to the "Imette St. Guillen" page which I try to update almost daily. Yesterday, someone had put in a comment (that you deleted, thank you) to the history edits page of Imette St. Guillen. I don't know who this cracker is (I have a suspicion) but the I.P. address, which is 38.117.139.174 appears before my login of MurderWatcher1. It appears that this person put in a phrase in the history section. From my discussions with the network administrator here in my firm, it might be someone whom I work with; I forgot to lock-up my computer yesterday and from what I understand, everyone here may have the same I.P. address, but not my login and password. I'm pretty embarassed so please understand that I didn't make this edit. I would appreciate it if you would look into this matter and please remove the phrase "whose greatest fan is Chris Mangan" from all of the edits. Thank you. A few more questions if I may. I'm wondering if I can upload a PDF copy of the "A Night For Imette" fundraiser which I had attended last year? The PDF would help to further document the scholarship creation in her name at Boston Latin High School. On another matter, I had created the "Fountain Avenue", the "Ramona Moore" page and I'm trying to add to those webpages as well. I had taken a panoramic digital picture of Fountain Avenue but the file size is 25MB. Can this be viewed on Wikipedia? FYI, I had become involved in Imette's case last year. Any suggestions that you can give me would be greatly appreciated, thank you. --MurderWatcher1 14:20, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

No interest to the external links

Why is it spamming? Please explain. Are the external links irrelvant to the pages of the languages? For a reader to the page, they want to know more information. Why are the external links inappropriate? Gaia2767spm 15:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The policies here are WP:EL, Wikipedia:Spam and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Addition of the same external link to a large number of pages is considered to be an indication of a conflict of interest, that however relevant the site might be, the user is using Wikipedia to publicise that site. Using Wikipedia to publicise a site is considered to be spamming. Whereas the addition of one or two relevant links to a site from different articles is acceptible, when it becomes clear that the number of links is for the purpose of increasing traffic to that site. I suggest you limit the number of links to those articles immediately relevant — e.g. I bet you site has nothing useful to say on Sogdian language, so don't link from that article, to do so would be misleading. — Gareth Hughes 15:23, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry because really don't know that policies and what the spam page is talking about. Thx for explanation. So the next time to limit the external links to 1-2 most appropriate pages only. Gaia2767spm 15:43, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Would like to have the external links in PIE language, for the texts and glossaries, any problem?Gaia2767spm 16:29, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure that would be appropriate. — Gareth Hughes 19:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Much thx. Know more about the wikipedia policy now.Gaia2767spm 23:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Block question

I'm handling the unblock request for Meowy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Can you clarify whether this block is regarding the recent comments (last four days) on Talk:Başkale and dialog on Meowy's talk page or stretchs back to something earlier?--Chaser - T 20:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I gave the last warning after he made a personal attack against another user on Talk:Başkale. He had previously been involved in personal attacks on Talk:Turkish Van. Meowy's response to my warning was to make offensive remarks about me (some of which the user removed from their talk page). Whether directed towards me or another user, Meowy continued to make personal attacks after receiving a warning. Following the principle that harassment should be dealt with promptly for the benefit of the community. Following an earlier block of 24 hours for 3RR, I gave the second block for 48 hours. I think it's clear that Meowy has a history of edit warring and vicious comments. I feel it's appropriate to give a strong message that such behaviour is not tolerated on Wikipedia. — Gareth Hughes 21:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I gave up on you and didn't notice the response until I'd already declined the unblock request. I declined the request and affirmed the block just based on the recent stuff. If an editor responds to warnings from an administrator with more personal attacks, I don't have much tolerance for it.--Chaser - T 21:23, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

ernest renan was no a racist!

hello mister garret hughes: Dunno if I can call you a Brother in Christ( and if you can get offended because it), if you are a John Stott anglican, or a Stephen Sizer anglican (http://www.moriel.org/israel/stephen_sizer.htm), although I must to remember Stott endorse to Sizer. By now just remember Islam are no a race, it`s a religion. To signal faults in muslims-a religion - is no identical to be a racist. It`s a fair critique from religion.

And if the comments are right, as is the case with Renan`s opinions it is even more so.

True Racism is to display hatred toward arabs, kurdish, iranians or turkish; as the famous column in Babil newspaper in Iraq devoted to insult Iranians, or the cartoons in Iranians newspapers calling to Azeris "cockroaches" . Or calling to australian, venezuelan, american, british and swedish women, -even teenagers- "harlots who must to be ... by muslims machos", as in various different incidents happened round the world, between them the infamous sermons by mullah Omar Abdel Rahman. I recommend you to buy the film "Lé Destin" by pro-palestinian atheist activist Youssef Chahine on topic "Islam and Science". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tioeliecer (talk • contribs) 17:54, 16 June 2007.

Please read my comment on the article's talk page. You appear not to understand what the article is saying. — Gareth Hughes 18:27, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

To tell me, to work only in other languages was a rude comment, mister Hughes. The problem is "discredited maverick" is an offensive term and point of view. And to denounces Renan as a protonazi, believing in European racial superiority is simply false. Read the authors themselves, nobody used that phrase. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tioeliecer (talk • contribs) 21:36, 16 June 2007.

Yes, it is rude, but it is your mistaken reading of the text that is causing the problem. The text is about the analysis of Said's critics on his work: it isn't directly about Said or Renan. Added to this, your arguments on the talk page make very little sense. If you do not understand the language of the article, and I cannot understand you writing English, what else can I do but tell you that you might be better working a language in which you're more proficient? — Gareth Hughes 00:57, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

The fact here is: I will delete any reference to Renan as a "discredited maverick". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tioeliecer (talk • contribs) 23:42, 17 June 2007.

Declaring refusal to work with other Wikipedians is not a good idea. Have you not noticed that the text has changed? If so you are blindly reverting me. You should be discussing the issue on the article talk page rather than constantly reverting. — Gareth Hughes 22:49, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

help me with christian palestinians

help me with edits

help me with formatting christian palestinian edits

hello reverend Gareth, I am tioeliecer, I had info. to add to article, but because I access through cybercafe, I hadn´t enough time to edit my contributions. Help me with this: A Gaza Baptist Church Seized by terrorists: link: http://www.comeandsee.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=781

Palestine: Palestinian gunmen burn Qalqiliya YMCA http://www.comeandsee.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=768

Palestine: Bible Society library bombed in Gaza : link:http://www.comeandsee.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=796 And on a reported dead link: change this: 17^ Five churches bombed and attacked AP via Yahoo! News 16 September 2006 (Link dead as of 15 January 2007) for this http://www.comeandsee.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=769 Palestinian muslims demonstrate in support from Bible Socity work in Gaza: http://www.christiantoday.com/article/palestinian.muslims.protest.against.bible.society.bombing.in.gaza/10701.htm http://www.biblenetworknews.com/europe_middleeast/103100_israel.html

You can add these links as references/sources: http://www.christianzionists.org -a website by Sizer against this ideology- http://www.religioustolerance.org/ata01.htm http://healtheland.wordpress.com/2007/02/11/palestinian-christians-being-persecuted-versus-real-christian-persecution/

My personal background is: I`m an evangelical, no a zionist,. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tioeliecer (talk • contribs) 18:07, 16 June 2007.

I'm not entirely sure what you are asking. — Gareth Hughes 18:28, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

you wrote: "I am most interested in working on articles about language and linguistics, and religion and spirituality", in your profile, you appears to be concerned with islam-related articles. This is my reason to select you as collaborator in article on christians in palestine. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tioeliecer (talk • contribs) 21:38, 16 June 2007.

What is it you are wanting to do? — Gareth Hughes 00:57, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

according you:

nothing can be said against muslims?. islam is a race?. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tioeliecer (talk • contribs) 00:36, 19 June 2007.

Of course, I never said this or anything like it. You appear to be having difficulty with two-way communication. — Gareth Hughes 09:31, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Origin of Allah as a name of or ref to God

Hi, thanks for your service to the "Free Engcyclopedia", please see the talkpage of Allah and discuss. This should be a topic of interest to you. ephix 20:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

A detailed analysis of your hypothesis has been given at Talk:Allah. — Gareth Hughes 21:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

thanks for refraining from WP:BITE, im preparing a repsonse. ephix 22:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

User:Mariam83

Hi,

I've already reported her for WP:3RR, which she carries on, along with edit warring, personal attacks (OK< toned down since I warned her on that), and deleting sourced info. Could you do something (preferably block?) Bouha 13:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

This user seems to be showing quite a few bad habits — edit warring and blanking warnings — if this user calms down and engages in fruitful discussion, we might get somewhere. A block might be counter-productive. — Gareth Hughes 13:59, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you think the latter: this user has carried on reverting having had two [[WP:3RR] warnings, both of which have been deleted, I think at least once. There's also evidence that this person was blocked from editing from an IP (see the complaint on the 3RR noticeboard for details). Anyway, it's up to you, I'm just puzzled by the assertion of counterproductivity. Bouha 14:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

It looks like others have escalated the problem and the user has not edited for 18 minutes. It looks like the problem originated from a genuine difference of opinion over an article or two. — Gareth Hughes 14:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello,

Collounsbury, along with two other users (Bouha and Lonewolf BC), one of which has already been warned by another admin, keep reverting a page that I only added annotated evidence to. I keep asking them to explain what they find so objectionable about annotated evidence derived from the sources cited on the article, but they have yet to answer me. Instead, they keep resorting to personal insults that basically amount to biting, as I am a newcomer (3rd or 4th day). Since it's only my third day, I am not yet familiar with all the rules. I tried to be civil at first, but they kept reverting the pages and insulting me as a person. I admit I overreacted after a while, but only because my edits were being reverted unfairly. What is wrong with annotated evidence? as in numbers. The additions that I made were objective, FACTUAL and neutral. The page that I am referring to is called- Berber people. While I understand that consensus is imp, and I did try to reach an agreement at first, I believe accuracy and objectivity surpass it in importance. I'm really not sure what the problem is. It is not as if I added subjective material.. Mariam83 14:09, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

As I have already said, there are problems on all sides. Do not remove warnings from your talk page — it's like running from the scene of a crime. Refrain from editing the articles, and engage in genuine discussion on the article talk pages. If you present good arguments, other users will side with you. If you feel that you are being mistreated, tell someone, but do not carry on as if you have a right to be right. — Gareth Hughes 14:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, it appears that Mariam83 might have been reincarnated as User:Khalidmn. Any way you could check this out (I've opened up a supsected sockpuppet case)? Thanks for checking back last time to see what was happening. Bouha 18:22, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

o.k. I was exxagerating here

I`m so sorry, but your use from ironic language toward me disturbes me. I promises never more to uses that term.

But the article is propaganda, it tries to proves :

Edward Said was a serious scholar. Him was nothing from it. The article tries to downplay critiques (and critics) toward him. It`s absurd to term him "a metanationalist humanist" and a "militant nationalist". He appears in the list from proposers from a binational state, and two states solution. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tioeliecer (talk • contribs) 15:58, 20 June 2007.

if islam is no a race

why a man attacking muslims is called a racist? why you edit EVERY article on islam and muslims, gives rude and ironic response to somebody criticizing to muslims? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tioeliecer (talk • contribs) 16:02, 20 June 2007.

Tioeliecer, your comments come after you perpetrated a very serious personal attack against me. I have struggled to come to terms with understanding your poor English (good English is pretty much a requirement here, but there are other Wikipedias for different languages) and your inability thereby to understand what articles are saying. I have not called anyone a racist, but have quoted Renan's own words to suggest that his views on race on widely rejected today. I do not edit 'EVERY' article on Islam and Muslims, but should be free so to do. If I have appeared rude and ironic to you, it is because you have repeatedly presented poorly written and spurious arguments for your edits. Use the article talk pages for comments on articles, do not harass me or other users and learn to sign your posts. — Gareth Hughes 16:13, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Uploaded a PDF - for 'Imette St. Guillen' Page

Hello, Garzo. I'm wondering if a PDF that I created from the Fundraiser in her honor can be put as a link onto the 'Imette St. Guillen' page, please? I uploaded same before signing this post. Thank you for any help.--MurderWatcher1 19:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether this is what the image name-space is for, and I'm not sure whether the brochure would be considered encyclopaedic — a somewhat subjective term, I grant you. Try adding it to the article and see if you get any comments from others. — Gareth Hughes 00:28, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Gareth. Well, I've uploaded it three times now. It appears to work.--MurderWatcher1 19:24, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Mahdi Reverts

Hey, I'm glad to see someone else pulling out these links, I was worrying that I'd run into the 3RR for my troubles. Isn't there some way we could list unreliable sources so that a bot could just whisk them out automatically? Or something, anything. Over in the articles on Chinese history it's not such a problem, but these Islamic articles are so packed with blogs and webpages run by who-knows-what group or people that it's a mess. Elijahmeeks 16:50, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Created Chanel Petro-Nixon Page - Questions

Hello again, Gareth. I created a page for Chanel Petro-Nixon today but I'm still researching her case, etc. Two prompts appeared right after I created the new Wikipedia reference. I'm I doing this OKAY? It will take me time to research her life and murder and I'm wondering if there is a policy about this on Wikipedia, as well as time limits on page creation.

"Christian arabs"

Hi. Could you please stop enforcing the category "Christian arabs" on non arabic Christians living in the middle east? This is wrong. We middle-eastern Christians, though not arabs, have gone through Arabization, and that needs to stop. We are not arabs. We have our own ethnicity, and we shouldn't be forced to be called "Christian arabs". If a Christian European is born in the middle east, should he be called a "Christian arab" because of that reason alone? Please understand, they are Syriac Christians (i.e. of Assyrian ancestry), and most of them speak Aramaic, though a lot of them are forgetting it. As someone who speaks Aramaic, you should respect this fact, and not appease muslims who want to call everyone arabs just because they're in the middle east. We are not closely related to the arabs from Saudiarabia. We have our own ethnicity, please stop forcing upon us some alien arab ethnicity. That's oppression. EliasAlucard|Talk 12:17 26 Jun, 2007 (UTC)

You removed it from a number of articles, I put it back with good reasons. I think the word 'enforcing' is a bit strong for that. That's the word you started with; you end with 'oppression', another strong word. You are taking this personally — noting the 'we' — and that may not be a good thing. Ethnicity in the Middle East is a very complicated issue, and many Melkites in the Middle East do consider themselves to be Arab. It is not 'Muslim propaganda' that they be called Arab. If anything, it's propaganda to equate Arab with Muslim. There is an important history of Arab Christians, which many Melkites and Rum Orthodox consider to be their heritage. To not let them express that would be, in your words 'oppression'. What exactly is your background? Because it seems that you are doing the usual Assyrian Revisionist thing of extending some idea of ethnicity (this article makes an interesting read) to as many Middle-East Christians as poosible. — Gareth Hughes 10:37, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm Assyrian. I'm not into Assyrian revisionism (if such topic exists). If they are not Arabs, why call them Christian Arabs? In the case of Maronites, it's true that they have some Arab background, but that's very little. Yes, I take this personally. So would you if you would've been called Arab just because you came from a region that had been subjugated by Arabs. In the case of Melkites, they are of Greek ancestry, and perhaps a little bit Assyrian ancestry. Why call them Arabs? Yes, they probably don't speak Greek any longer, but that doesn't make them Arabs. Equating islam with Arabs is not propaganda at all. Islam's very founder was an Arab, and it's indisputable that the majority of all Arabs are muslims. How is that propaganda? Look, let me tell you something about religion in the middle-east: we are ethnoreligious. That means, we marry people of the same faith. Sure, there are some rare cases where muslims and christians marry, but it's far from the de facto standard. That said, the ethnicity has been largely well preserved in the middle-east. Now please, stop calling non-arabs Arabs. EliasAlucard|Talk 12:57 26 Jun, 2007 (UTC)

If they have Arabic as their first language than they Arabs, if not then they are not. Please refer to Defining who is an Arab for further details. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 11:01, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Now, EliasAlucard is calling Melkites 'of Greek ancestry'. The only real reason anyone can give for that is that some of their ancestors wrote in Greek, which was common in the large cities of the region until the seventh century. As usage of Greek died out, it was replaced by Arabic. For some people, speaking Arabic makes one an Arab — as FayssalF has pointed out. Now, I don't believe that. However, there are records of many Christians from Arabia moving to Syria and Egypt during the eighth century. Many Melkites do consider Arabian Christians to be part of their heritage. I think it would be good to hear what some Melkites think about this. However, I am aware that those who identify as Assyrians, especially those in diaspora, are campaigning to include as many Christians in the Middle East under that flag for political reasons. I think that's quite obvious and difficult to deny. — Gareth Hughes 11:14, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

More ad hominem attacks on my character. Believe me, anyone who isn't Assyrian, I do not wish to call him/her Assyrian. It's not a campaign. If someone is Assyrian, he should be called Assyrian. Period. Being able to speak Arabic does not make you an Arab. Ethnicity isn't defined by the language you speak (though, that is an important part, it's not the crucial way to define ethnicity). For instance, I speak Arabic, still, I am not an Arab. I am Assyrian, and I refuse to deny my ancestry, and I refuse to claim to be something I'm not. Melkites (the very word has Aramaic roots), are not Arabs and shouldn't be called Arabs. Also, you resort to personal attacks and falsely accuse me of "Assyrian revisionism". That's a strong word. Let me tell you something, to claim that all Christians from the middle east are Arabs, that's, if anything, Arab revisionism, and you know it. EliasAlucard|Talk 13:24 26 Jun, 2007 (UTC)

It isn't ad hominem. You brought your own ethnicity into this. I'm pointing out that it isn't subjective. You really have to keep your cool. — Gareth Hughes 12:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Let's keep it cool guys. I believe both of you are right. What about "Arabized Syriac Christians"? Elias, please note that neither you nor anyone is sure if all these Christians have not been mixed w/ Arabs. I am saying this because i am well aware of a somehow similar situation in the Maghreb in general and Morocco in particular where many Berbers were mixed w/ Arabs and it became very hard to distinguish a Berber from an Arab in many cases. Many Moroccans refered to as Arabs are of Berber origins in fact. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 12:53, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

BCP

Dear Mr. Hughes, I am a little unclear as to why such attention is being paid to the definite article in the headings. That gentleness which characterises good faith seems to be lacking. It may be that you have discovered a WP policy on the matter, but your use of words like 'mess' earlier puzzle me. Roger Arguile 10:00, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. I believe there to be two issues here. The first is outlined in the Manual of Style: 'articles (a, an, and the) are typically avoided, and never occur first'. I certainly do realise that there are a lot of Wikipedia guidelines, many of which I have not read, and so your message is a good reminder that I should point to which guideline I am following as I edit. The second issue is the editing style of Frederick jones (talk · contribs) and my comment on his edits being a 'mess'. I believe that it is fair to say that, although Mr Jones does provide good ellaboration to articles, his edits are full of spelling mistakes, poor grammar and bad punctuation. Less of an issue has been his inclusion of in-line references where an article uses footnotes, which I have moved to footnotes and streamlined. Although, this latter issue is more to do with neatness of style, I do find the abovementioned errors to reflect badly on the quality of the articles concerned. I do not want to discourage Mr Jones from editing as he does add useful material to articles, and so I have felt it better to follow behind tidying up. As far as the articles are concerned, this combination of editing has benefited overall. However, I confess that the repeated tidying of such simple errors has been frustrating at times. I assure you that the good faith remains even if its associated gentleness has sometimes been curbed by frustration. I could believe that Mr Jones has some or other difficulty with typing that would explain the poor quality of the majority of his edits. It is that belief that has led me not to confront him, but to follow his edits with my own. Perhaps, if you think it appropriate, it may be time to discuss the issue with Mr Jones. I think you will find that David Underdown (talk · contribs) has also become somewhat frustrated with his editing. — Gareth Hughes 12:59, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for that. I confess to stil being unhappy about the application of the same guidelines for sub-headings as for articles. It makes a diminution in precision, for which reason I have asked for clarification and explanation in the appropriate article. Really, it sounds nonsense in my ear to write of '1662 prayer book'. The removal of the article in substantive entries is a mere convenience to indexers which scarcely applies within an article and I am surprised that there is any support for it. As for 'mess', I think that, given the deprivation of sight or hearing we do have to be especially gentle. The brutal style we often suffer from,which may be a consequence of US influence or just the confidence of youth is, I believe, to be avoided. That is why I refuse to use nicknames and give people titles. It encourages a reticence which the speed of editing subverts. I wonder whether before slashing and burning my definite articles you might engage is consideration of the arguments. Wp not always delightfully combines peremptory rules with the implicit encouragement - by virute of its system - of irresponsibility. Even consensus can change. Roger Arguile 14:09, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Norwegian Dialects

Those are orthographies. I'm talking about dialects. Thanks for your answer though.199.126.28.20 13:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)