User talk:Dark Tichondrias/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Race (historical definitions)

Hello again. I said I would get back to you on your race definition articles. There are a number of issues here, but one of the most important ones is that most of the articles give no context to assert the notability of their subjects. For example, Wood Eater race says in its entirety "Anthropologist James Burnett also known as Lord Monboddo in his book Of the Origin and Progress of Language (1773) defined the semi-human Wood Eaters." We are not told: How did he define them? What differentiated them from other races? Is this race definition still considered valid by anthropologists? If not, when did it fall into disfavour? Who else has commented on this race definition? Did Burnett actually consider that they ate wood? Where were the wood-eaters based? What language did he suppose them to speak? On what evidence did he base his conclusions? And, most important of all: how historically important is this race definition?

You see, without any of this information, all we have is a single sentence that says 'someone in the eighteenth century defined a race'. To be blunt, I have the feeling that quite a few of these many historical race definitions would not survive AfD discussions. What should we do? --BillC 00:10, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I think most of these newly created race articles need to be folded into the main articles for the people who defined those races. --Lukobe 23:00, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Since Mongoloid, Caucasoid, Australoid, Capoid, and Negroid have their own page even though they are part of Carleton S. Coon's system, the other races should have their own page. If the races defined by Carleton S. Coon were all merged to his page, then it would be acceptable to do the same thing to the other race articles. -- I believe your logic here is faulty. There is plenty to say about Carleton S. Coon's races other than the fact that he defined them. There is hardly anything to say about the Wood Eaters race other than, as BillC puts it, "someone in the eighteenth century defined a race." Coon's races have large articles; the Wood Eaters article, for example, will never be anything more than a stub. --Lukobe 23:46, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Maybe I'll find some more information on Wood Eaters if I do more research.' -- Is that likely? --Lukobe 03:31, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

The issue is that we don't think there's enough significance here to make an article. This seems to have been a once-off statement by Burnett, a man who was once described by Dr Samuel Johnson as "a man who talks a great deal about nonsense and doesn't know it". We could easily have a thousand articles on the subjects of once-off racial classifications. What is there that demonstrates the significance of this racial classification? Please understand that the comments you have been receiving on this and other issues are not the result of people trying to get at you, but rather that you should consider whether or not these contributions are encyclopaedic material. Perhaps they could be brought together in one article that in itself would be encyclopaedic? --BillC 04:40, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

It is important to have an extensive listing of historical race scientists racial classification schemes, becuase it is shows classification is just an opinion. From the book Race The History of an Idea in America, there are records of race scientists disagreeing with each other. Historical race scientists disagreed with each other on who were included in what races and how many races existed. This does not make one historical race system more important than another. All racial classification schemes are important because they show there are no objective races. This is why every historical racial classification scheme is beneficial to have in an encylcopedia.

I'd like to second what BillC says much more eloquently than I--we don't necessarily dispute that having this sort of information in Wikipedia is important and useful, but we disagree on the best way it should be presented. You think it's better to have a multiplicity of short articles, we favor fewer longer articles. People may even be more likely to come across your information if you fold it into the longer articles, which have multiple links pointing to them. Many of your new articles, on the other hand, appear to be linked to from nowhere. --Lukobe 06:03, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. The Mongoloid article is 17kB; which makes it neither a long nor a short article. No-one, least of all Lukobe or I, is suggesting it be shortened. The reason why Mongoloid is not 'as short as all the other race articles' you have created is because the topic has significance: the material is encyclopaedic. Wood Eater race, at least in its present state, does not. This issue is not about Mongoloid, but rather the multitude of articles you have created, that lack incoming links, context or any assertion of the significance of their subject matter. --BillC 06:41, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

No, the reason [Mongoloid] is long is not because the "topic has significance"...[Wood eaters and other similar racial classifications] have the same context as Coon's system. They are historical races nobody believes in anymore.

I must disagree. As Race (historical definitions) says, Coon's system is "the most widely referenced 20th century racial classification." It is the one most people know and think in terms of. But I think we're getting slightly off the point here. I can do no better than echo what BillC writes immediately above... --Lukobe 19:24, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Template:Louis Agassiz Racial Definitions

Hey, thanks for making this template! -- Mac Davis] ⌇☢ ญƛ. 11:52, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Template Wizzard

I admit you are a wizzard on templates, but you should be carefull about how you build up your arguments. Where did you get the idea that "A New Division of the Earth" of François Bernier is a book.[[1]] Needless to say your conclusion about him being a "racial scientist" is a little bit shaky when only based on this particular observation. Would you also describe Herodotus as as a "racial scientist" -you might try it. He also came early, you know, and his observations were way more substantial than those of Bernier. If I remember "The Histories" correctly. Do not worry. All will be revealed, eventually. It's been nice talking to you. So long. (84.193.172.199 19:51, 20 April 2006 (UTC))

What is A New Division of the Earth? --Lukobe 00:09, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

You answered The New Division of Earth was a book. I know this because the source also displayed a volume number next to the title. So you haven't read the actual book? Then why didn't you include a citation of your source in the article? --Lukobe 05:42, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Dark Tichondrias, do you hold François Bernier to be "one of the first in a long line of racial scientists" because he is the first of the writers discussed in this book? --BillC 00:31, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

You read part of: "Memoirs Read Before the Anthropological Society of London" -namely Vol 1 1863-64,pp 36O-64 the location of T.Bendyshe's translation of Bernier's contribution to "Journal des Scavans",April 24, 1684; which is basically a transcription of a letter to one of his friends. Only the first half of the letter is about racial classification, the other half is about (universal?) feminine beauty. see [2]

(84.193.172.199 11:34, 21 April 2006 (UTC)) (moved from Lukobe's talk page)

Indian American

You should cite the books then instead of the website and create a reference section at the bottom of the page.--Dangerous-Boy 01:56, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Lapps race

Dark Tichondrias, are you sure Bernier called them the "Lapps race" when writing in French, not the "Lapp race"? Or did he merely call them the "Lapps"? Because "Lapps race" sounds like bad English to me. What's the actual citation from the book? --Lukobe 05:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

So it should be "Lapp race," then, if it's not merged to "Sami people," which I still think it should. Any objections to moving it to "Lapp race"? --Lukobe 05:20, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

To remember that François Bernier never wrote a book about racial classification would also be nice. Furthermore: [Importance of Historical Racial Definitions] (84.193.172.199 11:59, 27 April 2006 (UTC))

Francois Bernier's first defined race

Just merged it into the main Francois Bernier article. I'm sure you must understand that in this case there could hardly be made an argument for a standalone article when the race wasn't even given its own name and you had to name it with a phrase? I strongly feel that the other articles you've created mostly need merging into larger articles--do you feel this should be discussed in a wider context than your talk page? I'm happy to see if that can be made possible. (Like BillC, I don't really want to go the AfD route.) --Lukobe 05:37, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I would like to start doing this for other articles, like Anthropomorpha race, which even if it were decided should be a standalone article, should properly be "Homo anthropomorpha"--"Anthropomorpha race" isn't idiomatic. Thoughts? --Lukobe 04:29, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

This article should probably be merged. His classifications would best be labeled with a "Homo" in front of it instead of the word race behind it.-- Dark Tichondrias 13:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Glad you agree. I'll start merging articles when I get some free time. --Lukobe 17:50, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Does not the argument about Bernier's NO-BOOK count for anything ? What makes you merge this BOOK thing without a doubt ? This is no longer sloppy editing it is intelectual dishonesty. THERE IS NO SUCH BOOK. (84.193.172.199 10:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC))

Redirects

Hi. Just wanted to let you know that, when you make pages into redirects, you can't have a space between "#" and "REDIRECT". If you do, the redirect doesn't work. Thanks!  :) —Wknight94 (talk) 16:15, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Caucasian

It seems like you are going all over the place trying to post wrong information. Actually, terms like "Caucasian" are still used in forensic anthropology and thus still in scientific use. [3] It doesn't matter what a textbook said as many textbooks can have an agenda. For example I know history textbooks that openly condemn the Viatnam war instead of remaining neutral. And Most Indians ARE caucasians. Ask any forensic anthropologist. So I will remove some of the other claims. Zachorious 22:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

But forensic anthropology is science. That textbook may have said that but the fact that forensic anthropology is science is undeniable. Of course not everyoone in Europe North Africa, Middle East, and South Asia have that description. In some Eastern European countries there people with the epilitcal fold, usually only found in East/Southeast Asians and Amerindians! In Northeast India there are mongoloids and in the South there are negroids. However these people are in the minority and as a whole most Eastern Europe or India are Caucasian.

Terms like Caucasian, Mongoloid, Negroid, ect. may not be widely used in science anymore. This is true. But they are still used to describe major phenotypes in forensic anthropology as well as clines. So while it may not be as widely used they are still in scientific use non the less. Zachorious 06:12, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, do you know any anthropologists that classify Indians as not caucasian? Nearly all classifications I see identify 97% of all Indians as Caucasian, with the South having some traces of Australoid (but still mostly Caucasian). The idea that South Indians are a distinct negroid race was an idea invented by British Colonialist in order to divide and conquer India. I will leave the "some and other anthrpologists" in the Caucasian-American article up for now but if you cannot find an anthropological source that shows Indians are a different race/cline, then I'll have to change it back. Zachorious 06:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, many of these classifications come from Cloone's work. However nearly all forensic anthropologists use this system in one form of another. Some anthropologists use the terms; "Asian Man, African Man, European Man" but they all follow the same feature testing of Coone's book. I haven't heard "mongoloid" used as much anymore but caucasian (or caucasoid) and negroid are still widely used in forensic anthropology.

I stated "race/cline" not to equate the two terms, so don't get the wrong idea. The term "race" means many things to different people but as far as subspecies goes, yes there are no different racial subspecies. Zachorious 21:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Email

I noticed that you do not have wikipedia e-mail enabled. Nor do you make contact information available on your website. I'd like to contact you in a way that is not-so-public. Could you email me? I wouldn't mind if it was from a dummy account--I have something important to discuss with you.--Rockero 18:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

No response, huh? The only reason I wanted to contact you privately was out of concern for your anonymity. Is there any possibility I can encourage you to e-mail me? Please?--Rockero 22:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't know all the workings of computer viruses, but I am fairly certain that you have to download something from an e-mail in order to become infected. At any rate, I want to talk to you about one of your websites. Shall I just do it here?--Rockero 20:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Is it on more than one article?--Rockero 05:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Regarding use of Image:Dreadlord-warcraft-iii-image.jpg and Image:Dreadlords.jpg

Kindly remove this picture from your userpage as this is a fair use image which can only be used on respective articlespace. Use of this image on your userpage infringes copyrights. See Wikipedia:Fair use under Policy 9.

Regards,--Dangerous-Boy 08:47, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Redirects

Thanks for creating redirects to Asian American, but I don't believe anybody is going to spell "Asian" as "AZN". Regards, Mike Rosoft 19:33, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

• I see you have been experimenting with Wikipedia. Your change was determined to be unhelpful, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Vegaswikian 19:49, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirects are for Wikipedia:Redirect#What_do_we_use_redirects_for.3F several listed reasons. Internet slang or shortcuts is not one of them. Vegaswikian 19:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
    • If you think these deletes are not correct then you should use Wikipedia:Deletion review to have my actions reviewed. Vegaswikian 20:03, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
    • AZN is internet slang, not an alternate spelling. "Alternate spellings" refers mostly to differences between US and UK English, such as armor (US spelling) redirects to armour (UK spelling). Why don't you try User:SuggestBot to find something more productive to do than adding so many unneccesary redirects? Capable users will be able to find what they need without them. Timrem 21:22, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
      • • What I meant was, no one using a print encyclopdia would (I hope) expect to find the article they want on something "Asian" by looking up "AZN." In no formal sources would such language be used, either. Despite its open nature, Wikipedia is still an encyclopedia. At the very least, I would suggest you add {{R from misspelling}} on the redirects you are creating. Also, the arguement you made to me, "'Slang' when spoken by Asians/ 'Alternative' when spoken by British," is nonsensical when put with the rest of your response. Be it Asian or British (or American or French or Spanish or Australian or whatever), internet slang is rarely spoken, and alternate spellings rarely affect how the word would be spoken anyway. Another thing: when responding to me, you yourself made a distinction between British language alternatives and Asian internet language. Official alternative spellings are worthy of redirects, internet language is not. BR Columbia, for example, does not redirect to British Columbia even though BR is used to stand for British. Like Zoe suggested, you should try to improve the articles you are creating these redirects to instead of adding infinitly many redirects. And I do not "discriminate against the Asian race" as you have claimed, I simply try to help make Wikipedia the best encyclopedia it can be. Timrem 21:57, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
          • A few points:
            1. AZN does not uniquely mean Asian, it can also stand for Azerbaijani manat
            2. I was not looking for a good analogy, and BR Columbia was the best I thought of in a short amount of time
            3. Spelling dictates pronunciation in real life, not the other way around
            4. Instead of addressing the point I made, you just disputed my means of making that point
          • ...and a few errors:
            1. BR is not an acronym, acronyms are pronounced as if they are words
            2. BR Columbia would obviously refer to British Columbia (not Berium Renewal Columbia or whatever), just as Azn American would refer to Asian American in internet slang.
            3. Azn is slang, see AZN
          • I hope this clears things up. Timrem 22:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
      • What is with the godzillian Asian American redirects? 'Asain'? This article does not warrent fifty redirects, you're just going to have to assume people can spell. Czolgolz 20:37, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

okay, but how many redirects does one article need? YOu have at least twenty tagged for speedy deletion. Czolgolz 20:45, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

PLEASE STOP! Especially when all of your redirects are misspelled. It's Bhutan, not Butan. It's Asian, not Asain. It's Hmong, not Mong. User:Zoe|^(talk) 21:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia's policies do not allow for ridiculous numbers of misspelled redirections. User:Zoe|^(talk) 21:17, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

To begin with, those articles you're creating multitudes of redirects to are only one-sentence microstubs with no content. Why not spend your time actually creating content in those articles instead of creating huge numbers of ridiculous redirects? User:Zoe|^(talk) 21:21, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

DT, I must agree with the other posters here. While I don't think your redirects need deleting (I think they're harmless), I also think they're kind of a waste of your time. Wikipedia will benefit far more from your fleshing out the articles these redirects point to than from your creation of the redirects themselves (especially the more implausible ones). --Lukobe 05:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

You've created hundreds of redirects from Spanish titles. These are absolutely unnecessary. Please stop, now. Zetawoof^(ζ) 06:48, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Asiaphile see also links

Just because they're slurs (egg) or perversions (Asian fetish, though I bet some would disagree with you on just what constitutes a perversion) doesn't mean they're not related to Asiaphile--they're very related. The egg article as much as says egg is synonymous with Asiaphile except for the pejorative nature of the former. --Lukobe 21:56, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

STOP ADDING REDIRECTS

Stop adding redirects from Spanish-language versions of names. There is no reason to believe that anyone would type these phrases into the English wikipedia to look for the article in English. The appropriate thing to do is to link from the Spanish wikipedia to the English articles. As it stands you are only creating immense amounts of work for others who will have to go through deleting the redirects you have created. You have been asked to desist before, if you don't heed this advice you will be blocked from editing. The Land 08:58, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I have noted the message you have placed on your User page. Disliking the Spanish Wikipedia's policies is not an excuse to disrupt this one. We also have a policy, WP:POINT, which says 'don't disrupt the Wikipedia to make a point', even about other language encyclopedias. The Land 09:03, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I Reread policy

It says English redirects to Spanish pages, not the other way around, so no more Spanish-language redirects.--_Dark Tichondrias 09:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! The Land 09:16, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Image:Asiaphile Asian Love.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Asiaphile Asian Love.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.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs An Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races Teresa Lourenco Inter-American Defense Board Black Muslim Carl Meinhof Asian Pride NAAAP Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research Pierre-André Taguieff Sexual objectification The Bounty Wild type Phigus Simenon Koryak language Macanese people Ethnic stereotypes in popular culture José Vasconcelos Cheyenne Silver Peru Highway 1

Cleanup Race in biomedicine Nisei Japanese American Rob Schneider Merge Mansions of Rastafari Racial purity Ethnic Japanese Add Sources Multiracial List of Japanese Americans List of Vietnamese Americans Wikify Filipino Chinese cuisine Mark Rudd Kirant Expand Contemporary views on race Azeroth (world) Letter of the two sorries

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 05:06, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Pro-Asian Pro-Contrary

just curious what your division of watched users into the above categories means. --Lukobe 08:17, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

deletion of all ethnic categories

Have you noticed what is being proposed to be done to all the categories named 'xxx people by ethnic or national origin' (such as Category:American people by ethnic or national origin and all ethnic/national origin subcategories?

See Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 20

There does not seem to be anyone interested in this, but me. Are you? Do you know others? Thanks Hmains 04:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

INCOTW

You voted for Indian American, this week's Indian Colloboration of the Week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article. - Ganeshk (talk) 05:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Race (U.S. Census)

Please cease your change from Asian to Asian American and White to White American. Not all Asians counted in the U.S. Census are Americans and not all whites are Americans! Stop now. I will revert your changes in a bit. Please cease from changing the U.S. Cencus information. 12.40.26.171 15:16, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

You do know that white people came from Europe or do you not know this. Not all white people in the U.S. are Americans. If I came to the U.S. from Germany and filled out the census while in the U.S., I would mark "white" but I am not a white American. Stop your changes now! 12.40.26.171 15:21, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I am really not from Germany—that was only an example. The person would only be an American if he/she becomes a U.S. citizen. 12.40.26.171 15:23, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Same for Asians, not all Asians in the United States are Americans. 12.40.26.171 15:26, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

You have not stopped changing these things. Please cease now! 12.40.26.171 15:39, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I am not done reverting your edits yet—I will continue later when I get home and sign on as a registered user. Just know that I will be monitoring all of your edits from now on! Have a great day. 12.40.26.171 15:51, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Please stop changing Caucasian to white or Caucasian to white American. The rest of the Western world (including Australia) use the term "Caucasian" over white. It is only in the U.S. that the term "white" is more popular. The term Caucasian is a more precise term for the racial designation by the world and scientists, not "white." 12.40.26.171 15:55, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

On the European American page, not all European Americans are white. 12.40.26.171 16:00, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I suggest you take a class in college dealing with race and ethnicity before you continue to change racial/origin terms in articles. Are you or have you been in college yet? 12.40.26.171 16:03, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Well you would learn so much more about this issue if you take a class on it. It can be very interesting! Or at least read about it in textbooks if you are not at age or have graduated from college. No personal attacks there at all. Just reality! 12.40.26.171 16:10, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I thought we came to an agreement. Why are you re-inserting back the term and reverting my reverts? 12.40.26.171 16:15, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Didn't I tell you that not all white people in the U.S. are Americans? 12.40.26.171 16:16, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

USC

USC has an international student population that hovers near 10% of its 28k students. These include large numbers from the Pacific Rim and a big contingent from the UK and Europe. Assuming the breakdown is "____-American" isn't really going to work in the context of the student population breakdown. --Bobak 16:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Great, thanks for understanding. Happy editing! --Bobak 16:32, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Your edits to Kitchener, Ontario

Thank you for experimenting with the page Kitchener, Ontario on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Paul Cyr 19:48, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Why are you putting "American" terms in Canadian articles? --Lukobe 19:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

It was in this article, Kitchener. That's what Cyr is talking about. --Lukobe 20:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:Racemap.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Racemap.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.

Jkelly 23:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Removal of Personal Attack by Jkelly and Musical Linguist

This following unsigned comment by User:Dolgo Xwost has been unnecessarily removed by two users, User:Jkelly and User:Musical Linguist because they believe it is against the policy Wikipedia:Remove personal attacks, but this is not official policy. The actual policy states,"The remove personal attacks guideline (and the application thereof) is controversial. It has often been abused by malefactors, and may not have community consensus. It should, at most, be interpreted strictly and used sparingly."--Dark Tichondrias

Personal attack by banned user removedCheers! Jkelly 00:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi. This is a wiki. Comments may be edited here. If you really want a guideline in the Wikipedia namespace that specificies what may be removed from your userspace, see Wikipedia:Userpage, but common sense should tell you that we don't want to be publishing scatalogical attacks on editors left here by banned users. Jkelly 00:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Userbox

Hi there. I've noticed that you added a userbox to the listing at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Sexuality. Would you mind if I also included that userbox at User:MiraLuka/Userboxes/Sexuality? —Mira 06:41, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I think you might have misunderstood me. I don't want to copy the userbox, I just want to add a link to it from my page. —Mira 21:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Would you mind if I did the same thing with your cross-dressing box? —Mira 21:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Eurasian Genetic Supercluster

This page was removed from Wikipedia before I even had an opportunity to view it (my guess is JWB is the culprit). I would suggest that a single sentence mention of this proposed supercluster of population should be added to the Eurasian page, as JWB will not allow any mention of it elsewhere. -- Gerkinstock 02:18, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I just saw this comment now. I actually put a lot of effort into improving the previous Northern Eurasian Supercluster page instead of requesting deletion. However, someone later did nominate it for deletion, and the vote was for deletion. Given that, I think it makes sense to respect the previous vote. I did mark the new page for possible speedy deletion as a recreation of a page earlier voted down, and whichever admin processed it judged it to be such and deleted it. --JWB 01:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Salazar's Castle

Just so you know, I am removing the picture of the island from Salazar's Castle. It serves no purpose as Salazar's Castle is not on the island and the island is not under any control by Salazar. Best regards, Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 02:41, 17 June 2006 (UTC)