Jump to content

User talk:Doug Weller

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 198.48.181.93 (talk) at 14:47, 22 January 2014 (→renfrew and indo-europeanism). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User:Doug Weller
User:Doug Weller
User talk:Doug Weller
User talk:Doug Weller
User:Doug Weller/Workshop
User:Doug Weller/Workshop
Special:Prefixindex/User:Doug Weller
Special:Prefixindex/User:Doug Weller
User:Doug Weller/Userboxes
User:Doug Weller/Userboxes
Special:Contributions/Doug Weller
Special:Contributions/Doug Weller
Special:Emailuser/Doug Weller
Special:Emailuser/Doug Weller
home
Talk Page
Workshop
Site Map
Userboxes
Edits
Email

Notice Coming here to ask why I reverted your edit? Read this page first...

Please leave me new messages at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new section at the bottom. I usually notice messages soon. I attempt to keep conversations in one location, as I find it easier to follow them that way when they are archived. If you open a new conversation here, I will respond to you here. Please watchlist this page or check back for my reply. If I have already left a message at your talk page, unless I've requested follow-up here or it is a standard template message, I am watching it. If you leave your reply here, I may respond at your talk page if it seems better for context. If you aren't sure if I'm watching your page, or I'm slow to reply, feel free to approach me here.

Welcome to my talk page! I am an administrator here on Wikipedia. That means I am here to help. It does not mean that I have any special status or something, it just means that I get to push a few extra buttons to help maintain this encyclopedia.

If you need help with something, feel free to ask. Click here to start a new topic.
If I have not made any edits in a while, (check) you may get a faster response by posting your request in a more centralized place.



You can email me from this link but in the interests of Wiki-transparency, please message me on this page unless there are pressing reasons to do otherwise. Comments which I find to be uncivil, full of vulgarities, flame baiting, or that are excessively rude may be deleted without response. If I choose not to answer, that's my right; don't keep putting it back. I'll just delete and get annoyed at you.

Merry Christmas!


Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Seasons Greetings


SH is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Wikipedia: Daniel Whyte III

jwales@bomis.com

Mr. Wales:

We trust that you are doing well.

My name is Syntyche with Gospel Light Society Intl.

In December of 2008, we filled out the details on the Wikipedia page for our founder, Daniel Whyte III. Over the years, we have edited the page a couple of times to add information to it. We want to thank you and the Wikipedia staff for providing this free service that we and many others have benefitted from.

However, recently, we found out that some of the information on the page was removed by a user named Dougweller who stated that certain portions were not properly sourced. We attempted to add information to the page on yesterday with better sourcing, however, the same user took down the majority of content on the page as of this morning, December 31, 2013.

We do not want to cause any trouble regarding this matter, because if you knew Daniel Whyte III, you would know that he is not someone who is ineterested in being promoted, or desirous notoriety or fame. However, we found two articles online stating that Dougweller has been accused of removing factual information from other articles on Wikipedia. The links to those articles are below:

        • We sent the first link to you in a direct e-mail message as it was unable to go through.

The second link is: http://www.jasoncolavito.com/1/post/2013/03/scott-wolter-and-richard-thornton-accuse-wikipedia-cherokees-and-forest-service-of-anti-wolter-conspiracy.html

Honestly, we really do not know what is going on. But we cannot imagine Wikipedia or anybody else having a problem with a Christian minister and writer who has authored 34 books that do nothing but glorify God, proclaim Jesus Christ, and encourage young people and others to live good, decent, quality lives. If you feel like Doug Weller is just doing his job as you have instructed him, we are willing to be educated as to how to put things on Wikipedia so that they will not be taken off. We have no interest in supplying misleading information in this forum as we are Christian people who are striving to do the right thing. We were just taken aback and disturbed to find this negative information about someone editing Daniel Whyte III's Wikipedia page who claims to be associated with Wikipedia.

We would like to re-list the bio information along with the following information (which Dougweller removed) on the page:

1. Daniel Whyte III's degrees from accredited universities. He holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Theology from Bethany Divinity College, a Bachelor’s degree in Religion from Texas Wesleyan University, a Master’s degree in Religion and a Master of Divinity degree from Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary.

2. The list of Daniel Whyte III's books which have been published by Torch Legacy Publications (www.torchlegacy.com), which is officially registered in the State of Texas and is a part of GLM Omnimedia Group, LLC. Torch Legacy Publications has been around since 1992 and its books have been distributed through major distributors such as Choice Books, Bookworld, Ingram, Baker & Taylor, and STL Distribution, which have sold books to major bookstore chains such as Barnes & Noble, Borders, Books-a-Million, Family Christian Stores, Lifeway and others.

3. The list of radio broadcasts and podcasts which Daniel Whyte III is the host of.

Is there an editor/administrator who we can go through in order to make these changes and have them approved so that we will not have any further issues. We can provide proof for the three items mentioned above. Please let us know what we need to do. Your help is greatly appreciated.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Best Regards,

Syntyche

P.S.: We just found Doug Weller's name on your site as an administrator. That makes us feel a little better. So, we are going to forward this e-mail to him as well.

Also, we are going to resubmit the bio, as it came from our president's website. We didn't think we were violating any copyright issues by taking the information from our president's own website. If you do not mind, we are going to rewrite it and submit it with the proper sourcing. Or, if someone at Wikipedia needs to do it, we will be glad to send it to them for posting.

Happy New Year, Dougweller

Soham — is wishing you a Happy New Year! Welcome the 2014. Wishing you a happy and fruitful 2014 with good health and your wishes come true! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! May the 2014 goes well for you.

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:User:Pratyya Ghosh/Happy New Year}} to their talk page with a Happy New Year message.

AN You May Have Interest In

Information icon This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Message on my talk page

Hello, Doug Weller. You have new messages at AcidSnow's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Books & Bytes New Years Double Issue

Books & Bytes

Volume 1 Issue 3, December/January 2013

(Sign up for monthly delivery)

Happy New Year, and welcome to a special double issue of Books & Bytes. We've included a retrospective on the changes and progress TWL has seen over the last year, the results of the survey TWL participants completed in December, some of our plans for the future, a second interview with a Wiki Love Libraries coordinator, and more. Here's to 2014 being a year of expansion and innovation for TWL!

The Wikipedia Library completed the first 6 months of its Individual Engagement grant last week. Here's where we are and what we've done:

Increased access to sources: 1500 editors signed up for 3700 free accounts, individually worth over $500,000, with usage increases of 400-600%

Deep networking: Built relationships with Credo, HighBeam, Questia, JSTOR, Cochrane, LexisNexis, EBSCO, New York Times, and OCLC

New pilot projects: Started the Wikipedia Visiting Scholar project to empower university-affiliated Wikipedia researchers

Developed community: Created portal connecting 250 newsletter recipients, 30 library members, 3 volunteer coordinators, and 2 part-time contractors

Tech scoped: Spec'd out a reference tool for linking to full-text sources and established a basis for OAuth integration

Broad outreach: Wrote a feature article for Library Journal's The Digital Shift; presenting at the American Library Association annual meeting
...Read Books & Bytes!

A vandal

Is there something we can do about 216.162.91.10? He did repeated vandalism throughout the last two years, never did any constructive edit and just seem to continue vandalising articles now and then. Iry-Hor (talk) 17:09, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Iry-Hor, thanks for bringing this IP to my attention. It's a school with a long history of blocks, now blocked for a year. Dougweller (talk) 17:45, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Iry-Hor (talk) 19:04, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2014

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2014. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:16, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sion8

Hello Doug, I recently reverted a couple of edits to Americans by User:Sion8 and I noticed that his editing history has a rather disturbing trend. It seems that he is committed to removing instances of the word “American” and replacing them with “U.S.”. He even has something that looks like a kind of manifesto on his user page. I have counted at least seven ([[1]], [[2]], [[3]], [[4]], [[5]], [[6]], [[7]]) instances of him removing American from articles, and then I stopped counting. I was going to ask him to stop on his talk page, but then I noticed that he’s been around since 2006 and is clearly well acquainted with the rules by now, so I’m reporting him to you instead.

Oh, and good luck with Ancient Egyptian race controversy. That article attracts POV-pushers like whiplash attracts lawyers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.107.171.90 (talk) 09:25, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He's back...

Another sock of Andajara? Cheers, Λuα (Operibus anteire) 13:55, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. I was actually waiting for more. Do you have time for an SPI? Trying to write a new article. Dougweller (talk) 14:08, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And lying about what is or is not in sources. Dougweller (talk) 14:14, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's kinda obvious. I don't have much time today, but I'll wait till the weekend. If nothing is done by then, I'll try to get something going.
Cheers, Λuα (Operibus anteire) 14:38, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sikhism

Hi Fellow editor, I'm having a particular issue with this editor. He lacks WP:Competence and his command of English is extremly poor. I normally get quite a few "extremists" on the Sikh related articles, but this chap is persistent. I am trying to "Anglacise" the headings for Sikh and other India related articles, but because his understanding of English is so poor, he keeps reverting them back. I'm at a loss. I've tried everything. Working with him, and warning etc. Even other editors are getting a bit sick of him. Now he'ss got cute recently and added a warning on my talk page. Any ideas? Thanks SH 17:54, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Emigration from Europe

Thanks for reverting the use of U.S. to American in the article. I was hesitant to revert, as WP:COMMONNAME doesn't appear to apply in this instance. To my reading, it was a POV push which can't be pinned down as being such, so I wasn't prepared to risk an edit war over the matter.

Do you know of any RfC's or other debates on the subject which would indicate a preference? Having examined the issue several times before, I haven't been able to find any consensus on the matter in the guidelines. Cheers, in advance, for any assistance you could render. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:18, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Doug Weller. You have new messages at Iryna Harpy's talk page.
Message added 22:53, 17 January 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:53, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Central East Africa

Hello Doug. The requested move for this article is now waiting to be closed and I considered doing the close. Then I saw your name at the bottom of the page commenting about socking. I don't think you have voted in either the move or the merge, so it is probably safe for me to ask you if you have an opinion about what's going on. After I wrote this note I next observed that you full protected the article! Anyway, what do you think? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 00:46, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You kept "U.S. American ancestry", why?

As seen in the article "Emigration from Europe" (Asia in the "By region" section) you or someone else changed my edits to it, yet the already stated "U.S. American ancestry" of the Philippines was kept. However as much as I understand why it was there I do not understand why my edits to this article where changed when the reason I did it was because the Philippines had it already so I figured that no one would mind if I added more of it to the rest of the Asian places mentioned in the article. -- Sion8 (talk) 07:04, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also nothing "is wrong with "South American"?" the reason I changed it to the "mainland of the Americas" was because I found it weird that having "South American" in the sentence where Belize was also written made it confusing to someone that did not know that Belize is actually in North or Central America, depending on how one wants to divided the Americas. Sion8 (talk) 07:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I missed the U.S. American bit - I was just looking at your edit. You should have changed it to South and Central - mainland just looked weird. I'm glad you responded at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States and hope that you will agree there to follow the guidance of the other editors who also responded to my post. I've got my preferences about certain things that I'd like to change in articles but I don't as I know that I don't have consensus. Dougweller (talk) 08:55, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Revision deletion

I'd appreciate if you would take a look at the revision history of Counter-Strike and Counter-Strike: Source and delete most revisions from 195.181.206.x. They are mostly comments of a sexual nature in Danish, which I will not repeat here. They mention names (first names only) and seem to be a form of cyberbullying. Sjö (talk) 10:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I protected Counter-Strike for 3 days, the other article was already protected. Not on my watchlist though so let me know if further protection is needed. Thanks Sjö, Dougweller (talk) 10:47, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

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

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

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

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 11:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Penguins53

He's wreaking havoc on a slew of Syriac patriarchs. This has to stop. Laurel Lodged (talk)

Just saw it but it's late here, maybe sometime tomorrow I'll have another look. Dougweller (talk) 21:48, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug, Ok: I never said they were Turkish. I made a category for Assyrian/Syriac ethnicity writers that were born in/lived in the area corresponding to modern-day Turkey. @And Doug, what you're saying is something different. I added Syriac Biblical names because many of the Hebrew names came from Aramaic and are both historically and religiously significant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Penguins53 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Penguin's spamming of categories is a really bad idea. Adding "Iraqi" writer category to person(s) living in the 4th century, bad idea.[8] Adding "Turkish Assyrian writer" to articles that clearly do not mention them being Turkish/Turkic, bad idea.[9][10] Edit-warring over these bad ideas.......yeah. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:55, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am also having the same issues with this user. Please view: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents to see the discussion. Numerous amounts of edits involving Syrian figures or language. I would like to have your opinion Dougweller since your an Admin so please see the discussion. -- ♣Jerm♣729 04:16, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mate people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kuki (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:27, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On Dating Creation

I had discussion with the other user about it, previously. The given source, by Sunny Press doesn't add "Nasadiya Sukta" in whole page, you can check yourself from this link:-

http://books.google.com/books?id=x1haOIxj6aIC&pg=257#v=onepage&q&f=false

It's only the page(Nasadiya Sukta) itself that resembles the given info, but it should be wholly written, like i had. As for the Najemi being self published. In the WP:SRS it is noted that if the same author has published non-self published or through reliable publishers, it can be regarded as reliable source. But nonetheless. There are more sources that talks about similar thing, these should be reliable [11], [12], [13]. Bladesmulti (talk) 15:11, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, not using him as source for the information. Bladesmulti (talk) 16:48, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You forgot to sign on "Reliable source noticeboard"? I just added your name after your comment though. Hope it's ok. Bladesmulti (talk) 06:03, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Persephone

Thank you for your instructions. By mistake I didn't use the sandbox for the "Sumerian version". I will try to find a reliable source if available. Thanks. Jestmoon.jest 15:18, 19 January 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jestmoon (talk • contribs)

Tennessee Anthropologist

Yes, they're no longer in existence, although the new Tennessee Archaeology has apparently taken its place. I actually discovered that by accident; a Google search gave me this PDF, two full issues of the latter publication; page 1 of the original (PDF page 3) mentions the demise of Anthropologist in 2000. Curious what you mean, though: are you talking about the Bat Creek inscription? I've never heard of it before; I just went to Special:Search and typed bat creek. I've almost never been to the Southeast since the late 1990s, and not at all since 2005 except for one day last spring, when I just barely touched the NE and NW corners of Arkansas and Tennessee respectively — as a result, although I know comparatively little about the archaeology of the Ohio River states, I still know a lot more than I do about the Southeastern states. Nyttend (talk) 22:21, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 January 2014

Reply from RichardDHeath

Hi Doug, Thanks for your welcome, however great! I have uploaded three sections to the Talk area to see if people object and why. You will see they belong there even if the megalithic yard is officially case closed. The truncation of historical development on Wikipedia over what have been controversial subjects, claimed to be closed by certain academic interests, removes the integrity of the cumulative wisdom over the years that is real in its own right and useful for anyone knowing what has been tried and why it eventually failed to be accepted. Where on Wikipedia, are reasons given by "leading academics" about why the megalithic yard is definitively an incorrect conjecture? ~~RichardDHeath~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardDHeath (talk • contribs) 14:32, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request to provide my supervisor's contact information

Why did you delete entire paragraph in Chechen history? If you disagree with something put citation needed. I also plan to put Glenn Beck's article citation on the genocide of 1944: "This operation was carried out during one day – February 23, 1944. 20% died en route. Ironically, the Chechen families were transported in the American-made Studebaker trucks, provided by the allied U.S. as war aid."[1] Please provide me with your supervisor's contact information. I would like to see if Wikipedia really about "neutral" view. Thank you Kavkas (talk) 00:27, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dougweller. I'm willing to act as your supervisor in this matter, if you don't already have one. I'm mostly tied up until Friday though. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:36, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
:-) Demiurge1000, if you want to get involved in this area, please be my guest. I've got enough nationalist pov problems on my plate already. Dougweller (talk) 05:20, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User page polices

I don't remember user page polices, but is it alright to advertise another website on the user page if it's your own? The reason I'm asking because I was about to talk to user: Joaopaulopontes about unsourced and unexplained edits involving article: Aristobulus II. I have not discussed anything yet about the website posted on his/her user page or the edits yet. I would like your consult first about the user page before I start a discussion about the edits to this user. — cheers — ♣Jerm♣729 07:51, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Although advertising such as referral links is not allowed, I think this is perfectly ok and doesn't come under the description of excessive unrelated material at WP:USERPAGE. Dougweller (talk) 17:37, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thnx for the input...just suspicious about it. -- ♣Jerm♣729 17:40, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

POV-pushing

Could you take a look at User:Devanampriya? He's POV-pushing and close to edit-warring at several articles (Yoga, Dharmachakra) at once, and taking recourse to the familiair rap of discrediting academic sources which are not in his favour. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:51, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not point of view pushing. You have made some questionable assertions about the chronology of hinduism on those pages without a proper discussion on the talk pages. Some of them are very basic errors regarding yoga--which even britannica (hardly hindu nationalist) asserts is one of the 6 orthodox schools of hinduism, but you have contested this fact as well. You are also removing my content through rewords (i.e. dharmachakra article to get around 3RR). More than a few users have pushed back against your views, including your friend bladesmulti.
Rather than prematurely involving admins, wouldn't it be best to initiate a proper/collegial dialogue on the hinduism article talk page? As I mentioned already, it would save us both time and acrimony. It is up to you which track we take our disputes, but I do hope we can resolve it the way wikipedia intended--through civil consensus on talk.

Regards,

Devanampriya (talk) 14:17, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gateside, North Ayrshire

Hello. Can you help? I obtained permission from the author of a poem about her days in Gateside to place it on the Gateside article. It was removed and called 'Vanity Doggerel'. This and the comments have upset the author of the poem and she would like that section of the talk page removed as her friends are commenting on it. Is that acceptable and if so, what is the procedure? Thanks Rosser Gruffydd 20:11, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

You could have deleted your own comment yourself, but I've done it for you. I'm afraid that it never did belong in the article. Only if were both written by a well-known poet and then commented on by the media, other poets, etc would a poem belong in an article on a place. I've certainly never seen one. How did you end up finding me? Dougweller (talk) 21:40, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why the patronising approach

I am just a honest person who has tried to do a good job on a page. If I got something wrong sorry, but your approach is arrogant and rude. Honest people with a wish to contribute will be put off if experienced editors like yourself take an arrogant approach.J Beake (talk) 21:54, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very sorry if my tone seems arrogant, it isn't meant to be. It may be short, but that's just because given all the articles on my watchlist I don't have time to go into as much detail as might be ideal. Dougweller (talk) 22:15, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for removing my contribution to Gospel of Judas. I will resubmit when it meets standards. Maybe you would like to help? Sahansdal (talk) 07:56, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

renfrew and indo-europeanism

hi.

1) renfrew *is* a creationist. that's the basis of his work. there's a long history of archaeologists, some very prominent, that wish to align the archaeological record with biblical accounts. in terms of titles that he holds, he's a very prominent academic, but he doesn't really seek to hide that his alternate theory is an attempt to align the spread of the indo-european languages with a tower of babel like scenario. his ideas have been through several revisions, for the precise reason that he's trying to fit the evidence to his narrative and has to modify it when holes are pointed out. regardless, he articulates the most widely cited counter-theory to gimbutas'.

2) there's a long history of indeo-europeanism being skewed as a basis for nazism. it's a legitimate science. it doesn't come with racial ideas of supremacy. and there's not really anything valid to connect the things together. with gimbutas, her ideas were published after the war was over. the suggestion is legitimately a goofy witch hunt. it's not a new thing. and it doesn't belong in any credible source.

so, i'm going to acknowledge that i may have been a little pissy, but the content of my responses is valid and i'm going to try and reword it and put it back. there's two points - (1) suggestions that gimbutas had anything to do with nazism or ideologies of racial supremacy are baseless attacks that have no basis in any valid discussion of her research and (2) renfrew is gimbutas' most prominent critic, and he approaches the topic from a christian/creationist viewpoint that informs his criticism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.48.181.93 (talk) 13:35, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your post here. The problem with what you are saying about Renfrew is the lack of reliable sources - or I guess that would be it if he were dead. But as he is alive, we need him saying that he is approaching his work from a Christian point of view. I certainly find it hard to believe he's a Creationist - I looked for sources suggesting that or even if he has any religious beliefs and couldn't find them, although I see he belongs to the Conservative party. I also agree that the business about Gimbutas and Nazism doesn't belong in the article unless it is sourced to some damn good sources and even then attributed. And I doubt that can be done. And yes, there's the history that indo-Europeanism gets skewed and we shouldn't let that affect Gimbutas' article. So, I agree that the Nazi thing doesn't belong, but I also think that you can't label Renfrew that way without the sort of sources you'd want for Gimbutas. (and I'm wondering what you mean by Creationist - you really think he believes in Noah and the flood?) Dougweller (talk) 13:49, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Renfrew served as Master of Jesus College from 1986 until 1997.". it comes out really strongly in his hypothesis. like, overwhelmingly. his approach seems to suggest he's into the "educated christian" symbolic thing. god didn't literally create the earth in seven days, but the seven days represent an abstract truth. and, likewise, the tower of babel represents an abstract truth - so the spread of the languages necessarily must come from the flood. hence, turkey as his urheimat. and hence the need to constantly revise the ideas to fit the narrative as evidence shifts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.48.181.93 (talk) 14:04, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Does anyone else actually make this interpretation of his work? I can see some Creationists doing that, but anyone mainstream? I don't see any reason to see being Master of Jesus as evidence - none of the other recent Master's seem particularly religious. Dougweller (talk) 14:22, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
i'm not an anthropologist or an archaeologist by training, i'm a mathematician dabbling outside my field. and it's been a few years since i read this stuff so the sources are blurry; i'm throwing out ideas that i'd rather see an expert evaluate than post. that's why i'm communicating through the talk pages. but what i'll say is that, with gimbutas, her ideas about kurgans remain the mainstream. it's her ideas tying neolithic religion to fertility cults and, by extension, to a matriarchal culture that are up for debate. for example, a lot of people will argue that the existence of a female-centered religion could actually uphold a type of patriarchy that reduced women to symbols. and there's actually been a lot of push back by *feminists* that see it contradicting their ideas of patriarchy being a sort of universal of civilization. but, renfrew's ideas about the spread of languages are not accepted by linguists. if you check the page on his anatolian hypothesis, you'll see the opposition in terms of dating. it's a hypothesis that simply doesn't make linguistic sense. the only way to make sense of it is to interpret it as an interpretation of the tower of babel. one of the unusual things that renfrew does in his hypothesis is scatter the languages all at once from a central point, rather than have them evolve in bunches. so, iranian and indian go out from the urheimat one at a time rather than separating at as indo-iranian. again: linguists oppose this strenuously. it only makes sense in a biblical interpretation. but, i can't source anybody else that has published this obvious reading. really, i'll be honest: my fleeting interest in this has passed, and i'm going to do something else now.

Need attention with Sati and Death by Burning

Since I have seen that you have solved similar issues before, I would like to notify you this one. A user is making really disruptive edits on the page Sati (practice), Not even a single time he would bring to talk page, when I brought the issue to his talk page, he would make irresponsible reply like, "you think modern historian cite these stats", which is already contradictory. Check the history of death by burning, he made the similar and more edits on this page, due to the on going issues with the article of Sati(seen in talk page), I removed it, as per description on edit summary, but he reverted each of my edits, calling them "vandalism". And later on his talk page he writes "It is not surprising that vandals like you start bullying others." Yet no better source has been presented. Thanks, waiting for reply. Bladesmulti (talk) 13:54, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/35286/
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Doug_Weller&oldid=591873869"