User talk:74.38.35.171

Please do not bring this up any more in any other locations. Based on the new consensus for the pictures of Muhammad, any new consensus making will for sure cause the picture of Baha'u'llah to come back to the top of the article. Just be happy with it's current location. It's the best that can come out. -- Jeff3000 19:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Alright. Even though I still think it would be best to not make it easy to stumble on, and/or note at the top be called a warning, if any attempt to debate this will turn the tide for the worse then I'm not going to give it a shot. I don't believe this is the best, but if any attempt to make it better will actually make it worse, then I'd better leave it the way it is. 74.38.35.171 20:12, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

The more you bring this up, the more attention it gets; it's not a useful discussion. It comes down to a matter of what some view as censorship and POV. By not having a picture on the same page, some editors view that the Baha'i POV has provided for a forced censorship over the vast population. Linking to an image was shot down in the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy example. Linking was seen to imply a specific POV, when Wikipedia needed to be neutral. -- Jeff3000 21:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, so it was an NPOV issue. Should I delete my postings there to "dowse the flames" before this thing flashes up? 74.38.35.171 21:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Nothing ever gets deleted, it's in the history, so no use. I would recommend that you get an actual username, however, conversing with an IP is difficult. -- Jeff3000 22:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Anyway, you answered my question sufficiently just now, so I'm going to cut and run like mad from this issue :) 74.38.35.171 22:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but you may wish to create a account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits, including:

• The use of a username of your choice, provided that it is appropriate.
• The use of your own watchlist, which shows when articles you are interested in have changed.
• The ability to create new pages.
• The ability to rename pages.
• The ability to edit semi-protected pages.
• The ability to upload images.
• The ability to customize the appearance and behavior of the website.
• Your IP address will no longer be visible to other users.

We hope that you choose to become a Wikipedian and create an account. Feel free to ask me any questions you may have on my talk page. By the way, make sure to sign and date your comments with four tildes (~~~~). -Will Beback · † · 06:54, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Asia

I can see from the talk page on the Asia article that you know the Middle East is not part of Asia. Please register to make the Asia article express the facts.--^DarkTea 13:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't "know" the Middle East is not part of Asia. It is not part of Asia-Pacific, but it is part of the continent of Asia. I've never seen the "eight-continent model" where the "Middle East" is a continent all it's own. To me, a six-continent model is really the best, where Europe and Asia are considered as one continent, so we have Eurasia. Africa has a much better claim to continenthood than Europe since it has it's own tectonic plate. North and South America have better claim too as separate continents since they have their own tectonic plates. Eurasia though, has only one. But seven continents is how it is usually seen, with Europe and Asia being considered two distinct continents, and I've never heard of the "Continent of the Middle East". If the Middle East is not part of the continent of Asia, what continent is it, then?! 74.38.35.171 19:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

---