User talk:Cush

CUSH'S TALK PAGE

Click here to leave me a note.

Tolkienion Maps

Hey there Cush! I didn't know you were the owner of Tolkienion, I love that site, been going to it since the early days and have been working on getting that #1 spot on your links page for years :) All this talk about maps has got me thinking about uploading my maps I have offline to Tolkien Gateway, I know there are some in there that are yours from Tolkienion and I wanted to ask for permission from you first. Keep up the great work! --Hyarion 17:17, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rohl

I have a question about Rohl's chronology (and yours I think). I see you divided the 20th Dynasty into three parts and overlapped them. It is a very interesting approach. Where can I find evidence for and against such approach? Is there any evidence that would not allow you to do this? Thanks and I'll be looking forward to your answer. AG —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.202.27 (talk) 19:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because there are three distinct lines within the 20th Dynasty (see image). Cush (talk) 17:44, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you take the chart off the Rohl page? Are you amending it? TuckerResearch (talk) 20:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have downloaded the New Chronology (2005).xls from the Yahoo group and I have entered its data into my Local NC manager. Now I have to structure it so I can produce a new overview. I will also have to update my database, which will take quite some effort... Cush (talk) 21:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NC manager

Cush, I am mightily impressed with your NC software. Is there any way you would share this wonderful tool? I have no programming capability and a million dates and names scattered throughout a bunch of notebooks. What do you think of the Lords of Avaris? I haven't read it yet. TuckerResearch (talk) 17:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, do you support the New Chronology as proposed by Rohl? That would be a requirement. And then I'd have to think about giving you access to my database (the software connects to a server).

As for the Lords of Avaris, I am still struggling with the complexity of interconnections that Rohl shows to exist. I am re-reading it at the moment to extract usable dates out of it.

Is there a way to send a personal message on wikiedia?

Cush (talk) 18:38, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, ever since I saw his Pharaoh's and Kings TV special when I was about 16. I have tweaked the years up and down because I have a different Exodus date, but all the synchronisms are the same. I haven't begun Lords of Avaris yet, and my contributions to the Yahoo! Group have been less than sparse since I started work on my PhD, but I am still a Rohlian at heart.

Is the NC manager a standalone piece of software?

I don't know about the personal messaging, if I had to guess I would say no.

TuckerResearch (talk) 23:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The NC manager (which is a .NET application) is not really a standalone software. It requires a database on a (web-)server and a php script that will relay the data (since my provider does not host a .NET framework yet). But if you'd install e.g. xampp on your machine it'll work. I could also write an aspx page to replace the php on a local machine, but that would require IIS to be on your machine (comes with the windows setup). On the other hand I could of course let you use my database, so everything is stored in one place ;-) It would be best if you sent me an e-mail. Just use "E-mail this user" link on my user page.

Cush (talk) 05:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, y'all, I have implemented an offline-version of the NC manager. Who wants it?? Cush (talk) 20:10, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, it works great so far. It is a helpful tool for people making chronologies and working with the New Chronology. TuckerResearch (talk) 04:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No bugs found yet? :-) I think I will implement a few new ways to export data, maybe to Excel or so. Cush (talk) 05:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still enjoying the NC Manager - capital work! I just began reading The Lords of Avaris, it seems there are a million more dates to look into! TuckerResearch (talk) 18:24, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox

CUSH
CUSH
≡ CUSH ≡
♆ CUSH ♆

Rktect stuff

Example1: {{bibleverse|1|Samuel|3:16-4:18|31}} produces a link to the NIV translation (31 in the source list as linked below): 1 Samuel 3:16–4:18
Example2: {{bibleverse||Genesis|1:15-16|HE}} produces: Genesis 1:15–16

Here is a sample list (this list is subject to change, please check link above):

Code	Translation
(do not include or, just number or text)
1000	Show user all options
31 or NIV	New International Version (Biblegateway)
49 or NASB	New American Standard Bible (BibleGateway)
9 or KJV	King James Version (BibleGateway)
105 or HE	Hebrew-English - paraellel MT and JPS 1917 (Mechon Mamre)
65 or TM	The Message (BibleGateway)

Auditory processing disorder

Timeline of British Monarchs

Akhenaten and Palestine

"No he didn't!" (Sorry, getting into kid-talk mode there :). What's your source for saying he did? PiCo (talk) 09:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can track down a book source, but have you ever read the Amarna letters PiCo? TuckerResearch (talk) 23:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC) -- Here: Elwell, Walter (2001). Tyndale Bible Dictionary. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers. p. 409. ISBN 0842370897. - I added the citation to the Exodus page. TuckerResearch (talk) 23:31, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chronology at the Crossroads

Cush,

Do you own a copy of Bernard Newgrosh's Chronology at the Crossroads: The Late Bronze Age in Western Asia? If you don't, I can make a pdf copy of its chapter 18, entitled "A Chronicle of the New Chronology," which give a nice list of events, synchronisms, and dates between 1182 and 870, and post it on the forum.

TuckerResearch (talk) 23:27, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would indeed appreciate it very much, if you could make such a pdf for me. :-) Cush (talk) 01:50, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added the pdf to your History-Book.net New Chronology forum, under Mesopotamian Chronology, in the Assyrian Chronology thread. I hope you find it informative. TuckerResearch (talk) 02:48, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Helpful site

I figured that this could be helpful to you: http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/ TuckerResearch (talk) 20:17, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will look into that. Seems interesting at a first glance. Cush (talk) 22:27, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For your recent reversion at Pi-hahiroth‎. I think we have a recurring problem, have you seen [1]? 17:24, 2 January 2009 (UTC)dougweller (talk)

This is the the same stuff that is edited every now and then into the "Stations list of the Exodus" article. I am not sure there is a need for a Pi-hahiroth article in the first place. Cush (talk) 18:33, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ubaid

Yeh, I updated the Ubaid Period article to include the actual site (archaeology etc) and some misc updates, and coords. Seemed mostly ready to add to COTANE.Ploversegg (talk) 04:46, 15 April 2009 (UTC)ploversegg[reply]

I have adjusted the coordinates somewhat. I suppose this is the right spot?

I used http://www.baghdadmuseum.org/usace/ and entry off http://www.cemml.colostate.edu/cultural/09476/iraq05a.html which were about the same. Ploversegg (talk) 19:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)ploversegg[reply]

The latter of your websites has 30.955608920,46.046645324 for Ubaid. However there is nothing visible at the surface. And it's almost 2 km from the location I gave. So which one is right? Cush (talk) 05:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some links

You might be interested in this site - it's a blog (very academic and respectable) with lots of links to online resources. Haven't found anything in it about biblical chronology yet :) PiCo (talk) 09:06, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which site? Cush (talk) 12:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - [2]. PiCo (talk) 00:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is a lot of religiously motivated material. I do not trust religious people when it comes to archaeological and historical accuracy simply because of their obvious conflict of interests. Especially I do not trust Jews, because people who fabricate deities have no trouble fabricating history as well. Jewish records of the Exodus or of the glorious kings and judges are just not sound. I wouldn't trust or even ask the Vatican or Evangelicals about the historicity of Jesus either... Cush (talk) 16:52, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The site is academic, not religious. "PaleoJudaica.com is an experiment that aims to chronicle and comment on current developments (mainly as recorded in Internet sources) in the academic field of ancient Judaism and its historical and literary context." People with a religious slant would call it atheistic. It's run by Jim Davila, Reader in Early Jewish Studies at St Andrews University, Scotland - quite respectable in terms of his competence to pick what's relevant and interesting in the field. The link I put above is to various sources Davila has found online. His actual blog is here. PiCo (talk) 07:49, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What in the world distinguishes Jews from Christians, Hindus, etc when it comes to 'fabricating' gods? It's just part of human nature in any case. Dougweller (talk) 10:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New Chronology page

Hey Cush. I just wanted to drop by and say that you've acquitted yourself very well in the "battle royal" over the New Chronology (Rohl) page. I particularly like your image, "File:NC Egyptian chronology comparison.png," though I'd like to recommend that you tell us who the "Shaw" of the conventional chronology and what work you got it from. You could put it in the caption or on the image description page. Otherwise, kudos.

TuckerResearch (talk) 02:19, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for the identification of Shaw above. You probably noticed I fixed up the image's page. Also, so you know, I merged David Rohl - geographical theories into the New Chronology (Rohl) article, as I think there was a consensus that the page wasn't notable enough or necessary (see: Talk:David Rohl - geographical theories). TuckerResearch (talk) 03:55, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yahweh

Cush, if I can tear you away from your exchange with Seeker, I really would like your views on what we can do to reduce the amount of space taken up in Yahweh by huge slabs of quotation, and to re-focus that section more on the nature of Yahweh as depicted in the various books. (And frankly, I don't think that discussion with Seeker is ever going to be fruitful). PiCo (talk) 02:13, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In fact I fail to understand what these quotes do to illustrate the character of the biblical deity. There should be descriptive text instead to explain what the quotes imply. Just quoting the bible without giving interpretation by a reliable secondary source is OR and should be tagged with the religious-text-as-primary-source tag. CUSH 02:28, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'd be grateful if you'd put that on the Yahweh talk-page. PiCo (talk) 03:07, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POV Yahweh Vocalization Side-note

Hello Cush. Just replied to your latest reply to me in the Talk:Yahweh page, and I wanted to add a personal side-note to that. I don't think we actually disagree on what I was saying, I may just not be explaining my thought clearly enough. I have generally noted that you and PiCo are — for the most part — on the same page as I am on cleaning up the Y article.

Now that we have finally removed the behemoth sections about the vocalization that use to be in the article, I want to be vigilant about making sure all that does not creep back in. That discussion should, instead, go to the Tetra"n article, and that any discussion about the vocalization that remains within the Y article be kept to a absolute minimum (only present where really necessary, not going into much detail about it) and that it be neutral about that discussion (if people want to know more about it, they can go to the Tetra"n article for it).

That's a basic summary, and I get the feeling that you agree with these thoughts. — al-Shimoni (talk) 10:39, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bible

Regarding this edit, I am reading the sentence you've tagged as unreferenced, and it doesn't seem to make much sense to me, or at the very least it is out of context. In other words, the lack of a reference is not the real problem with this statement. Would you object to having it removed altogether? -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:39, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would rather see who exactly makes the interpretations that the biblical books create a story arc, and on what grounds such interpretation are made. · CUSH · 10:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"most Christian denominations teach that the Bible itself has an overarching message." So they do: they say that the narrative arc begins with the Creation, moves on to God's election of Israel as his Chosen People and to whom he promises the Messiah, that Israel then sins and that God instead sends his son (the Messiah) to the whole world instead of just the Jews. This is pretty basic to Christian theology, surely? (You don't have to believe it, just note it in the article). PiCo (talk) 02:33, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know that. However, there are warring interpretations of such an arc, especially between Judaism and Christianity. So it is of importance who claims what and on what grounds. And not just vaguely, but who exactly claims what and based on what biblical passages. · CUSH · 06:30, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and "Grüeß di!"

I've found you as a new user in the Bavarian (Boarisch) Wikipedia. Do you have special interests there? Having been landed here, I see that you consider yourself non-religious, what's your good right; but moreover you think that the world would be better without any religion. Also your good right - but don't you presume that this might influence your editing negatively? For instance, I am a Catholic; but see just my article on Miguel Torga, that agnostic Portuguese poet and writer (if you have any Bavarian, of course ;-) ). Hellsepp 10:08, 3 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellsepp (talk • contribs)

Pi-Rameses, where it is

On Crossing of the Red Sea (or whatever it's called), you were called out for making a correction on this point (this is your comment from the talk page): "The academic consensus about the location of biblical Ramses is Pi-Ramesses. That is not in the Wadi Tumilat." But you were right. I misinterpreted the source. My apologies, and I hope I now fixed it correctly. (By the way, it wasn't me who called you out on your correction, but I feel responsible since it was my error that was being defended so mistakenly).PiCo (talk) 09:57, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Find more ancient locations at my ancientlocations.net.

Oh, it was user Weaponbb7 who likes to revert me everywhere he can just because he hates me for not following his religionist points of view. But he is only a poor uneducated bully. ≡ CUSH ≡ 10:07, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to say whatever it is my source (Tommy Thompson) is saying. If I've misinterpreted, please correct. But you'll need a source, Thompson or someone else. PiCo (talk) 11:22, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yahweh

The lead has now headed off into la-la-land. The article is not worth editing. PiCo (talk) 03:23, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this was bound to happen. The lead should be 5 or 6 lines at most, and yet comprehensively sum up the subject matter. There should be no collection of evidence for any particular position in the lead. ≡ CUSH ≡ 04:48, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gollum

Please feel free to contribute to discussion at this talk page regarding etymology of names in Middle-earth articles. Carl Sixsmith (talk) 11:36, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seeeker is at ANI

I took it to WP:ANI#User:Seeker02421 disruption at Yahweh earlier today. The Resident Anthropologist (Talk / contribs) 18:40, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, at ANI I read that warnings are proposed. However, this issue has been going on for at least two full years now. Seeker02421 comes up with his rubbish every few months, then he gets warned and sometimes banned for a few days. But he always comes back. I have conducted lengthy discussions with him (and with his previous account) but even after all this time the point of his argument still escaped me. His position seems to be that the identification of the biblical god depends on the usage of the "right" spelling. He seems to claim that if the name is different then another deity is meant.

I think permanent ban would be the right procedure (there have been numerous "final" warnings already), but of course I am not an admin to suggest thus at ANI. ♆ CUSH ♆ 19:20, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cush you dont have to be an admin at to give opinions at ANI The Resident Anthropologist (Talk / contribs) 21:35, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh? Very good... :-) ♆ CUSH ♆ 22:07, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cush you indicate a second account... This account has been registered awhile could you expand on this? The Resident Anthropologist (Talk / contribs) 22:47, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I checked and I must admit I had this confused. ♆ CUSH ♆ 23:38, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well he is blocked until he agrees to play by our rules.... if he agrees the next infraction is probably a perma-block. The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 20:43, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And Seeker is back on Wiki confused to why (s)he has been blocked Blocked The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 20:51, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See, that's the other thing about Seeker: his edits always render a talk page illegible because he just can't use wiki syntax right. Personally I am through with the issue. I have no intention to go into discussions with Seeker any more because I have already wasted too much time to try to get some logic and some education into him. I only hope he leaves the Tetragrammaton article and related articles alone. ♆ CUSH ♆ 21:35, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NPOVN where I've raised the Indus Valley edits

Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 11:34, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion spree

Perhaps too much sugar in the cornflakes? PiCo (talk) 09:41, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What the heck are you doing? You'll get reverted anyways. Maybe deleting huge parts of articles isn't the most subtle way to remove dubious content. Especially when you seem to be rather coarse with your deletions.

I do support your deletion of the biblical quotes section from the Yahweh article. ♆ CUSH ♆ 09:48, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking of you when I did it :) PiCo (talk) 09:50, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How so? ♆ CUSH ♆ 09:56, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I mean I thought you'd approve. Wikipedia doesn't need editing, it needs clear-felling. PiCo (talk) 10:17, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We've been at the same point already in December of 2009... ♆ CUSH ♆ 10:23, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes. Well, I've made the Big Delete, and we'll see what happens. Seeker seems to have retired, but Corinne is still around. PiCo (talk) 10:32, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have not yet encountered Corinne. ♆ CUSH ♆ 10:42, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Might be thinking the wrong nick. But there's one editor who's intent on keeping the anthology.PiCo (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, now I know... ♆ CUSH ♆ 06:41, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Usage of G-d

Hi Cush, In the Tetragrammaton article in an edit summary you asked, "Substitution of HaShem or Adonai: can we get a source for the usage of "G-d" ?" - which questioned the word "some" in the article. I'm not sure there is a definitive source. There is a lot of variety in usage. For WP editors that have scruples about typing the word "God", there is a Template:G-d which may be either transcluded or substituted, which allows them to type "G-d" or "g-d", and "God" (always capitalized) appears in the article. (People who prefer not to capitalize the word "God" may use that template also. :)
There is a WP article subsection on G-d which you might look at too. See the Shaimos reference link there. I don't have a clue what "Shaimos" is all about.
HTH (Hope This Helps. :) —Telpardec (talk) 20:12, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness me! I just read through the discussion about the G-d template. If I were compassionate I'd feel sorry for those ultraobservant Jews who think their god so small-minded...

Anyways, I would be interested in actual numbers of who really uses g-d instead of god. ♆ CUSH ♆ 21:09, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, whatever the number, it increased by plus two since we both used it too in these messages. Google for "G-d" was not very helpful, with most of the results being the two letters "GD", abbreviations for things like General Dynamics, Grateful Dead, even a "G-d Damn" in the mix. There were a couple of fairly well written pages explaining the term:
Judaism 101 The Name of G-d
Why Do Jews Write "G-d" instead of "God"? (wisegeek.com)
Other letters besides the hyphen are occasionally used, like the apostrophe, which is actually a valid substitute for the letter "o", in words like isn't, meaning "is not".
HTH (Hope This Helps. :) —Telpardec TALK 08:36, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This practice always struck me as weird. Do Jews really think their deity not smart or lenient enough to know when God is abused ? And btw, since God is not a name, how does using the word infinge on Exodus 20:7? The deity's name is YHWH and it is transcribed in bible translations as LORD. So maybe Jews would write L-rd, but writing G-d is just nonsensical. ♆ CUSH ♆ 09:23, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

name-calling Jew

Knock it off, Cush. That post is unacceptable. Dougweller (talk) 08:49, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa called me and another editor assholes. Because we were against her fundamentalist views expressed in articles. Remember? I am done talking to that woman. Lisa is the only editor I truly dislike and I cannot AGF in her case, because I have known her for far too long to be so naive. ♆ CUSH ♆

Sounds as though you've both been out of line - where did she do that? I note she's called you a Rohl Fanboy so I might have a word with her about that. Dougweller (talk) 10:35, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know. A year ago or so. She got blocked a couple of days for it. But her attitude has never changed. She is always the same Lisa Liel. ♆ CUSH ♆ 10:59, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok, she should have been blocked, glad she was. Dougweller (talk) 12:45, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, by now I am used to religionist editors who come and go. Only Lisa remains, but I am used to her manipulations as well. And to her personal attacks, however veiled they may be... ;-) ♆ CUSH ♆ 13:28, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The insults occurred here . ♆ CUSH ♆ 21:57, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'Overwhelming'

See [3] and find page 31 (search for 'highlands'). Nothing there justifies overwhelming, the word should never have been there, it's an editor's interpretation. I'd remove it if it was about biblical evidence with the same wording in the source, so it should be removed here. Dougweller (talk) 19:35, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK. You are right in saying that "overwhelmingly" is wrong. "only" would be more appropriate. The archaeological evidence points to an Israelite community arising peacefully and internally in the highlands of Canaan. That's right. Exclusively. There is no archaeological evidence for the biblical story. None. You win. ♆ CUSH ♆ 19:51, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Bag end color2.jpeg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bag end color2.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:43, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The drawing without color is originally copyrighted by David Wyatt. I did the colorization (with the permission from David Wyatt) in 2003 for my now defunct website Tolkienion.com .

I don't know what license to assign to this. ♆ CUSH ♆ 00:58, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cush. You have new messages at Talk:Philadelphia (film).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jesus Christ

Do you care about this discussion, which involves an edit that in part at least concerns an issue you raised? If you are fine with the recent edit I won't keep arguing my point. Slrubenstein | Talk 18:52, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your graphic

I just saw your graphic - I took the liberty of uploading it to Jews. Oncenawhile (talk) 22:04, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why? ♆ CUSH ♆ 22:19, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because it clears up a point that many are confused about. Oncenawhile (talk) 08:44, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's already been removed. That was predictable. Jews on Wikipedia is a story of its own. ♆ CUSH ♆ 09:22, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A Question For You

Being a resident from Israel, I am not sure why you and many others continue to find fault with the nation of Israel. If warfare constantly began to erode your country, wouldn't you be concerned? Constantly claiming we are the hidden driving force behind wikipedia is as insulting, as it is ridiculous. I do not know why this is brought up every time, but I find it demonizing. I would love to hear your response.174.19.129.68 (talk) 06:37, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]