User talk:Adam777

You're right, I went with the top towns by population, according to the Antigua & Barbuda census. I'm not sure a Top 3 ranking makes much sense, in any case, and would argue that the amount of commerce done in Liberta and English Harbour outstrip that in Parham or Falmouth. (I think it would make sense to lump Falmouth and English Harbour anyway, as they flow into each other and share in supporting the yachting "industry.") I would be happy to continue this discussion. I just visit Antigua annually (since 1980) and if you live there, I would defer to you (and consider you very fortunate).

Apologies

I feel I owe you an apology for my comments towards you on the Christiano Ronaldo talk page, please don't take these comments seriously as I'm just a passionate football fan who was still rather annoyed about saturday's world cup match. So sorry and hopefully we can continue to contribute towards Wikipedia with no more disputes. :)

Freshprince 15:39, 3 July 2006 (UTC) [reply]

User:86.142.155.130

He's made two vandalous edits, and I've warned him twice. That extra bv wasn't really needed. -- Steel 19:18, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

William Gallas's comment

i dont understand what you are saying. It seems to me that you are saying my source is anti-Portugal national team. 71.254.210.160

ok, i understand what you mean now. i wasnt angry, i just didnt understand what you ment, your statment was a bit strange but now i know what you were trying to say. ill leave your edits the way they are 71.254.210.160

--

Arbitration

You presence is requested at the Arbitration Re: Removal of humus sapiens admin privilages due to administrative abuse. Please click Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration

Islamic Conference

I replied to u on my talk page, cause i saw that your usename was red (i assumed that this is a user name, never to be used again...). anyway, u may have a look at it. --Hectorian 04:12, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, btw, are u Portuguese?:) --Hectorian 04:14, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note, but, to be truthful, I have no idea what the Islamic Conference was thinking. Presumably, time will tell. Politis 16:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TRNC

(moved from my user page)

Hi. I am mentioning this here as I dont want this to get involved in the upcoming mediation regarding the TRNC. You recent additions to the history section are a direct copy and paste from Leonidas Koumakis's 'The Miracle a true story'. The information is pertient, though some parts of it arent neutral. However by doing a direct copy and paste you may be in violation of copyright. You might want to re-write that information or get a fair use agreement for it, as it is doubtful that another editor will let it stand. I will not touch it as I dont want to begin an edit war. Adam777 12:32, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Why do you claim that they are not neutral? Prove it --Aristovoulos 12:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, My name is James and I think your views on the ocupation of cyprus are very biased. I have just read the disscussion page and it is not my or Aristovoulos's POV that TRNC is not a seperate state but a Fact. Let me show you why...

If england invaded north wales tomorrow and called it the english republic of wales (which is exactly what turkey did to cyprus) would you agree that it was a state/country? I doubt it, so please refrain from spreading lies

Thank you Slogankid 17:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe he has a biased view but you also do. You have stated have you not that though not recognised officialy you believe that TRNC is a state which IS a lie. It is in fact an ocupation of another country. The UN recognises this fact Slogankid 17:35, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh god not another one. The TRNC is a 'De Facto' state. The term de facto means - in practice (illegal or legal). Nowhere have I said or even suggested that the TRNC is a legal entity but 'In Practice' it is a self governing state/region/entity or whatever you wish to call it. WILL YOU PLEASE look up the definition of de facto. Adam777

*Sigh* another one lost to turkish propaganda. In fact, In Practise, Legal and Illeagal are totaly seperate things. It is selvgoverning in practise but not a factual state nor a legal one --Slogankid 17:52, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear god you cant even comprehend what is written. The term de facto is applied regardless of the legality or illegality of something, sorry but thats a fact look it up. Secondly if the TRNC isnt a factual state (and yes an illegal one at that) then what is it...make believe? If you cross the green line moving north you will find yourself in an illegal, self governing region which is self named the TRNC....now thats a FACT or do you dispute that as well? Adam777 17:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Replied--Aristovoulos 19:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When in fact calling the TRNC a 'de facto illegal state in the north of the republic of cyprus' will suffice.Adam777

please explain why the two differ so much and you claim that it is a Greek POV when it is a "copy-paste" from the Security Council?

The "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus" was self-declared. The UN considers TRNC as legally invalid and calls for its withdrawal. It possesses an administration and infrastructure, located in the north of the Republic of Cyprus. The de jure Republic of Cyprus can not exert its authority over its northern third, because of the Turkish forces.

Pease read them both and explain.Aristovoulos 20:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would put 'illeagaly occupied area in northen cyprus' rather than an illegal state --Slogankid 12:36, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, please, I did not bring any meat or vegie puppet to any wikipedia. Get your facts straight. The mediation asked for a poll when the mediation understood that there was an issue (at least from my side), get your facts straight again. Why is your intro different from mine? That is what i do not understand and ask you to explain.Why do you keep passionately resisting what the security council states on this dispute and keep accusing me with no evidence.If for any reason you do not want to give me the answer in wikipedia kust say so, drop me a line i will email you and you reply... honestly--Aristovoulos 22:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation Cabal:

Hi LawrenceTrevallion, (I am also pasting this on Adams Talk page)

As you can see i am still trying to have a conversation with Adam777. As you also can see when Adam is questioned and has no answer he immediately changes the subject and accuses myself of being biased. Lets try to give Adam some more time, I need an answer on the following question from Adam, then we could discuss a poll.

Adams Intro "when in fact calling the TRNC a 'de facto illegal state in the north of the republic of cyprus' will suffice. Adam777 19:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)"[reply]

Please explain why the two intros differ so much and you disagree with the one i suggest?

The "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus" was self-declared. The UN considers TRNC as legally invalid and calls for its withdrawal. It possesses an administration and infrastructure, located in the north of the Republic of Cyprus. The de jure Republic of Cyprus can not exert its authority over its northern third, because of the Turkish forces.

lets give him some time..Aristovoulos 09:18, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adam777, I want to know your opinion about putting the intro to a vote? I see nothing wrong with it if both sides agree to let the vote be binding. Let me know on the talk page. LawrenceTrevallion 18:27, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My mediation is not binding, which is why I did not simply declare it and refuse any other suggestions. I cannot enforce my decision about "de facto" and Aristovoulos was still expressing concerns about it, which is one reason I decided to try a vote. The Cabal does not rule Wikipedia, though perhaps we will one day. :) LawrenceTrevallion 01:51, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adam stop accusing me and prove your accusations!!!!! Prove it or APOLOGIZE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I respect your opinions but not your accusations. I consider you a passionated person and i respect that too BUT NOT YOUR ACCUSATIONS.--Aristovoulos 16:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Citations or not in the TRNC article

Hi. I think that both should have a citation. i added an exact number for the missing GCs. be sure that when a number (any number) will be provided for the TCs, i will add the citation i said. i've choosen the number 1619, not cause it is higher, of course, but cause this is the only "exact" number i found. there have indeed been found some remains, however, most of them have not been identified(DNA)/proven to be non-human bones/proven to be older than 1974 or recent. i would propose a double number: 15..-1619 (or maybe the first could be lower if coming from reliable source). honestly, i am not giving a source at the moment because i am too lazy to search and find the most valid one (hard to search 2,7 million google results [1] Regards --Hectorian 02:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Adam

I am posting your comment here for continuity. Kindly keep the conversation here:

Nico the use of italics around the word turkish republic of northern cyrpus and your use of the weassel word 'styles' are POV and I have reverted them again. I corrected some text with a better use of English as well. We can discuss this like adults or you can continue to push POV edits on the cyrpus article - its up to you. The current version is neutral and anyone that isnt Greek would agree with me on that. Regards Adam777 17:07, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Response:

I didn't notice about italics. Never thought it would be considered POV, but don't mind normal font.
I removed 'styles' in my next edit (bad-English, not sure why it can be considered "POV" because I can't tell what it means; can you? -anyway I removed it.)
I am more than willing to discuss, as an adult or even as a child if you wish :-). Haven't shown otherwise to anyone.
Call me 'sensitive' if you wish, but I consider...
- Large headlines like "= Nico drop the POV =", as well as
- text like "you can continue to push POV edits" (huh? continue? when did I edit that article again? apart from this maybe?), and
- "anyone that isnt Greek would agree with me" (implying that all Greeks are biased)
...do not exactly help in maintaining one's temper and WP:AGF.
However, I am willing to put that behind me and cooperate to ameliorate the article. Just, please, be discreet from now on and assume my edits are sincere and unbiased, until proven otherwise. Let us not start on the wrong foot.

The rest, which doesn't concern our 'personal' e-relationship, we can discuss in the article talk if you wish. Ok?

PS: Your current version is ok. I checked it. Thanks. •NikoSilver• 20:35, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HI Nico. Well after going back over everything today I realise I overeacted. I honestly apologise, my main issue was those italics and it never even entered my head that it could be an ommission and not deliberate. I'll take a little more time when editing at work. I am honestly sorry.

I also apologise for the 'All Greeks' dig, that was childish of me and in the calm light of day wasnt very friendly at all. I do try to keep neutral even though Im well aware I must miss the mark at times. The two items I did change - ie the 'Northern Part' is a small issue that as a native English speaker I picked up on, its a small matter of the flow of words, very minor. The second was 'self styled' now whilst this is exactly what the TRNC is the phrase 'self styled' implies a certain negative tone. Again thats a small issue.

So to recap - I overreacted and I will count to ten in future. YOu have my sincere apologies. Adam777 22:51, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I stand amazed by your good-will. My apologies for being picky too. •NikoSilver• 23:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cyprus

No, it is not POV. Your version violates, as I have already pointed out (on Talk:TRNC - there is a big discussion). In fact, calling it the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus" is Turkish POV - occupied Cyprus or northern Cyprus is more neutral. Finally, don't threaten me.--Tekleni 16:39, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Undue weight doesnt apply. Greece and the ROC alone refer to the TRNC as 'Occupied Cyprus' pretty much the rest of the world uses the TRNC. This has been explained to you in the TRNC talk page and becuase of your nationalism you simply refuse to accept this, as it states in Undue weight We should not attempt to represent a dispute as if a view held by a small minority deserved as much attention as a majority view. You have not addressed why you need to extended the intro past being concise and neutral. The italics are POV please remove them (as you have yet to justify why they are being used). The past version was concise and neutral, your edits are CLEARLY desigend to push POV. Please re-word them or I will escalate this issue. Adam777 16:47, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No state recognizes an entity called TRNC in northern Cyprus other than Turkey, egro presenting it as a fact is undue weight and Turkish POV. Even the liberal BBC calls it the self-declared Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus [2]. The world (except Turkey) is in consensus that there is no TRNC, only occupied territory of the Republic of Cyprus. I refuse to accept your wording - make a more neutral proposal if you want. In this case, Turkish POV is the extremely small minority POV.--Tekleni 17:10, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So what do these other countries call the entity that they dont recognise...that right they call it the 'TRNC'. Your ideas of neutrality are laughable at best. My suggestion is (again) to remove the italics, re-word the pov slant of 'regime' and 'styles' and then is no dissagreement from me despite your need to duplicate details in the intro that are found in the article. YOu still havent explained why you are using italics? Have a good weekend I wont be back on Wikipedia till next week. Adam777 17:15, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No they don't call it the TRNC (provide proof of that - they use weasel words and avoid referring to it as such, but calling it something which calls itself the TRNC etc - see CIA World Factbook for an example [3] - note the scare quotes). I'm using italics in lieu of scare quotes, which is what the UN and the CIA above uses (as I'm sure you're well aware) - I think they are more neutral that scare quotes. Also, regime and styles have nothing to do with neutrality - the governments of legitimate states (e.g. North Korea and Iran) have been referred to as regimes.--Tekleni 17:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well the flight is late so Ive got some time. Lets be honest here, you are using italics in place of scare quotes to push your pov. The comparison between IRan and North Korea is interesting as they are regimes where totalitarins hold power. The inhabitants of the TRNC get to vote for their head of state, so they have a democratic system in place. The use of regime is about as accurate as calling the government of Sweden a regime. Anyway I think this is part of a broader issue on Wikipedia that has arisen due people with extreme points of view pushing their version of reality onto others. I think its time to take the main issues to a formal mediation and see what they see. I have read through your arguments on the TRNC page and looked at your edit history, you obviously have a dislike for anything related to Turkey and arent shy showing that in your selective edits. I am of the opinion that it is a waste of time to debate with you for that reason and I am prepared to let a biding formal mediation handle that. Take care. Adam777 17:43, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In 1974 Invasion by Turkey there were 200,000 Greek Cypriots displaced=

or do you think they dont know how many of their citizens were displaced. If you wish to contest the citation then discuss it on the talk page - however my citation is from the ROC government, or do YOU know better than they? Adam777

Have a look at these citations and then; you tell me:

Thanks for your note in my talk page, it is nice you are reading from Cyprus's documents. Since you are interested i am happy to provide some food for thought and suggest you read this as well.

Aristovoul0s 15:24, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cooperation board launched

A new (and overdue) Greek and Turkish cooperation and notification board has been launched here. Stop by, have a look and sound off! Cheers! Baristarim 07:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Johnson

Read the bleeding article, why don't you. Just to summarise:

The only player to lead the British Lions on two tours.
84 England caps; England's most capped lock forward.
Lead England to world cup victory in 2003
Lead Leicester to back-to-back European cup victories
Lead Leicester to four (or five dependnig on how you count)

It says this in the article. Now there are numerous sources that all say the same thing. Johnno was not no ordinary rugby player. I've seen him play. His leadership was phenomenal; Leicester were, nay are, a different team without him at the helm. Use your common sense, please. Rugbyball 21:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Advocacy

I opened your advocacy request. It shouldn't take too long to resolve. The statements added are clearly biased and unverifiable. A statement along the lines of "According to Sports Illustrated Martin Johnson is the greatest Rugby player of all time" would be fine (provided citations were available), but the current view Rugbyball keeps pushing blatently violates a couple of WP policies. I'll do what I can to help you get it cleared up quickly. You may contact me in whatever way is best for you. →Bobby← 15:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your Advocacy Case

Hi. The changes I made to the header section of the Martin Johnson article remain in place. I'll keep the page on my watrchlist for a while longer, but I'm going to close the advocacy request. If you see any questionable behavior on the article in the future, feel free to contact me directly without opening a new request. I hope the AMA experience was quick and easy, and I hope you continue to make bold contributions to WP. →Bobby← 14:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Harassment

Would u kindly stop harassing Aristovoul0s when he points out the truth and backs them up with facts? Please take your biased pro turkish propoganda off wikipedia and stop threatening people. Thanks--Slogankid 19:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Any editor is free to edit any article if he or she feels it is inacurate or NPOV, please read wikipedias policies. Adam777 14:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Every1 knows also what they did to us before that. Those tc could have been gc if it was a different part of the country. You accuse me of being POV when u clearly are. Your turkish propaganda is against the wiki rules so please stop spreading it. I thought i had made that clear last time. I dont know what you think we did 2 u or your country to make u hate us soo much but whatever u think we did to you, get over it(if i remember correctly ur welsh rite?)--Slogankid 20:12, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Any editor is free to edit any article if he or she feels it is inacurate or NPOV, please read wikipedias policies. Adam777 14:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hahaha you are really mature. Suppose you really should assume malice when stupidity will suffice. Calling my real world truths childish? Please go back to your lego and sheep. U obviously havnt seen wiki's NPOV policy which you clearly dont adhere to. Hope mummy gets you your playmobile for christmas, I know u want it.--Slogankid 21:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Any editor is free to edit any article if he or she feels it is inacurate or NPOV, please read wikipedias policies. Adam777 14:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Every1 please go to my talk page and u will c how idiotic he is. Look at the comments he has left me. He think he is really clever but obviously not. Calling me homosexual? that correct me if im wrong is a personal attack. If you continue i will report u to the proper authorities--Slogankid 16:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You could alternately just leave me the hell alone and keep your inane, idiotic, incorrect and imature views on my activities on wikipedia to yourself. You are the one who initially accused me of harrasment on my talk page for disagreeing with a nationalistic and highly biased editor on posts that had nothing to do with you. If you would have bothered to keep your unrelated opinions to yourself and not make the inital personal attack against me then we wouldnt be talking now. If you want to quote the rules then you had better adhere to them as well. Your hypocrisy is almost as staggering as your ignorance about history. Now go and read wikipedias rules on assuming good faith, harrasment and personal attacks will you. Adam777 17:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No1 has said tc didnt suffer. More GC died and lost their homes. Fact. You are not protecting TC rather than turkey. Turkeys excuse to invade cyprus was the TC even though nt much happened. Turkey fucked up the lives of ALL cypriots. Adam777 clearly dsnt know what he is talking about by his posts. I dont think i have personally attacked you much as you, maybe once or twice. Also u calling me hypocritical and highly POV? LOL--Slogankid 11:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I mean nt much more happened to 1 side than the other. Ur obviously biased to only report 1 side--Slogankid 14:15, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

u know as well as i do that the GC goverment is retarded and corrupt, that dosnt make T and the TC government neless so (dunno about corupt, definbately stupid) Im talking about real GC--Slogankid 21:42, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus

I've been reading some of your latest comments on Talk:Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and I strongly suggest you take a wiki-break, even if just for a few hours. These are only pixels, it's not worth anyone's blood pressure. A ecis^Brievenbus 15:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Walsh Page

"Bog-trotter" is a deeply offensive and racist pejorative. There is no place nor call for racists and their racist comments.

race2 /reɪs/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[reys] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun 1. a group of persons related by common descent or heredity. 2. a population so related.

Here's a quiz for a great mind such as yourself; which of the two below statements are sarcastic? Go on, I'm sure even you have the wit to do it!

"VandaliSing wikipedia" - a well known crime against humanity "Unashamed bigotry" - sad and lamentable, one of the greatest stains upon humanity(note I do not take offence to the personal insult, just the racist nonsense).

Propoganda Article

As far as i have read it, this article seems to be a work of a propaganda. Such articles has to be a shame for all wikipedia editors, but unfortenetly from the maturity level of the discussion above, i'm pretty confident that nothing is likely going to change in here. Sadly, a free encyclopedia can turn out be a battleground for some silly nationalists..--88.236.171.254 (talk) 20:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]