Jump to content

User talk:Lanternix/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Welcome!

Hello, Lanternix, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Arnoutf 12:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Userbox:Coptic

I have moved your page Userbox:Coptic to Template:user Coptic and tagged the original for speedy deletion. Userboxes belong in the template namespace, not the article namespace. Thanks, —Swpb talk contribs 05:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:SaintVerena.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:SaintVerena.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 19:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Copts

Hi! Finnaly I have a chance to meet a true Copt on Wiki. Can you please review [[1]]. My version was numerousely removed by Arab users. Thanks, Regards Ldingley 21:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Dear Coptic brother, I completely agree with you on Ethiopian and Eritrean issue. I think we should remove that passage in the introduction. As for why did Arabs attack my version. First of all, did you see info box on my version? Its specifically designed for separate ethnic groups. Based on research and sources I wanted to create the ethnic info box for Copts due to the simple fact that Copts are a separate nation from rest of Arab Egyptians. Secondly, they objected to the notion that Copts of today are direct descendants of ancient Egyptians. After studying the language and culture of the Copts there is no doubt of that. But their main objection was when i created that infobox with photos of the famous Copts. They want to downplay this fact of Coptic identity. I was outnumbered and my changes were removed. I did get some help from some Georgian users but in vain. Please make all necessary changes and fix any POVs you might find on the Copts article if your time will allow. Also I have a very interesting collection of historic and modern photos of Copt country and its people. I travelled there a while ago. Let me know if you are interested and I will email you my whole collection of Coptic images (some of them are very rare). Thanks for your massage and wishing you all the best. Ldingley 15:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Nabih Youssef

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Nabih Youssef, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Nabih Youssef. You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Argyriou (talk) 23:45, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

  • I don't quite care, I didn't put the article on Wikipedia. Maybe you can notify the people who wrote or edited it then have a voting and go with what the majority decides. Thanks - Lant
You did, at some point, edit the article, so I included you among the people I notified. If anyone objects, I'll probably take the article to an AfD; otherwise, I'll let an admin delete it in 5 (or whatever) days. Argyriou (talk) 04:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Marry Christmas

Marry Christmas my Copt brother, May the Lord Jesus Christ be with you and your family on this joyous day. Marry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Ldingley 16:32, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

The photos were sent to you! Thanks for warm wishes Ldingley 19:03, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Nofry

Nofry to you too , I could not find a cetgory of theologians in the copt article . Fr Menass Youhanna is very well known as a historian as his book provides a concise and yet comprehensive insight into the history of the Coptic church that is why I canged it back

I can see your point about Coptic or Egyptian and it seems reasonable , but from the other side the word Coptic has a lot of meannings related to it.

Best of luck

--Ghaly 19:49, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Arsenius the Great

I have no problem with a move to this article title, and will go ahead and do that. I try to add qualifiers (for example, "the Deacon" or "the Great") when I move saint articles so that the article title is as specific as possible and will not be a conflict later. As I read the recommendations of the naming conventions and the WIkiproject Saints, "Saint X" should be only rarely used as an article title, and I try to move articles into conformity with that. Thanks for your quick response, and I will go ahead and make that move per this conversation. Pastordavid 19:34, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah ... that's why I didn't use Arsenius the Great -- it is already in use as a redirect. I will put in a requested move, give it a day or two and an admin will make the move for us. Pastordavid 19:36, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Cut and Paste Moves


  • I agree the article needed moved, but please use either the move button, or the requested move page, so that article histories are not lost in the move. Thanks -- Pastordavid 21:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Watch for double redirects

When moving pages, as you did to Shenouda the Archimandrite, please remember to fix any double redirects. These create slow, unpleasant experiences for the reader, waste server resources, and make the navigational structure of the site confusing. Thank you.

DYK

Updated DYK query On 19 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sidhom Bishay, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Carabinieri 17:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Category:Coptic saints

We are bringing back the above category primarily because there seems to be some interest in bringing into existence a separate project dealing with Oriental Christianity, specifically including the Coptic Church. Actually, I am also in the process of reorganizating all of the Christian saints, and adding the category for each of the separate churches, including Anglicanism, Lutheranism, Catholicism, and all the Orthodox Churches, primarily to help these church-related Projects know which individuals fall within their scope. Unfortunately, there are at least a few Egyptian saints who are not specifically Coptic saints, Mark the Evangelist among them. Actually, he isn't even necessarily an Egyptian saint either. As I work on clarifying the various categorizations of all the Saints articles, and also help create the articles on all those individuals declared Saints which we don't already have, including the Coptic saints, it seems to me likely that at least some other Coptic saints will also not specifically qualify as "Egyptian". It is for those people that the Coptic category is going to be primarily used. However, like I said, I am still in the process of categorizing all the Saints articles, and a few other things as well, and it might take as long as a month for me to get just all the existing categorization completed. I will try to use the Coptic category primarily for those individuals who do not qualify as "Egyptian" though.
One other question. How do you think we would best categorize those saints who are Egyptian but who are not Coptic? Again, there will probably be at least a few of these. I would welcome any guidance in this matter. Thank you for your attention. John Carter 13:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The reason it was titled Category:Coptic saints was to conform to the existing other categories. However, I can see how it would be confusing, given the other Coptic churches. On that basis, I am proposing the category for renaming to eliminate any confusion. John Carter 18:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Pashons 10 (Coptic Orthodox liturgics)

A tag has been placed on Pashons 10 (Coptic Orthodox liturgics), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Realkyhick 17:20, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Meriam George edits

Hello. Can you please discuss your edits on this article? I've been making edit summaries, so I think that it is clear what I am trying to do, but you have not been using edit summaries, so I do not understand your edits. Is there something about this name that I do not understand? Typically, articles are sorted into categories using the last names of persons and the WP:MOS recommends also to refer to persons by last name instead of first name. Is there a custom with persons in Egypt that is different? If I understand the rationale, that it will be easy for us to obtain consensus. --After Midnight 0001 17:36, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Now that I understand, I won't be messing up that in the future. --After Midnight 0001 18:18, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

RE:Talk:Pashons 10 (Coptic Orthodox liturgics) and all Pashons articles

The problem I see here is one of context; i.e. anyone coming along and seeing Pashons 10 (Coptic Orthodox liturgics), Pashons 9 (Coptic Orthodox liturgics), etc is going to have absolutely no clue what these articles are about and why these concepts are in any way important if they are not already familiar with the concepts. I suggest you rewrite them a bit to better demonstrate the concepts in these articles to someone who isn't familiar with Coptic Orthodox liturgics. If you don't do that I suspect that this won't be the last time these are tagged for deletion (by the way, I declined to speedy delete Talk:Pashons 10 (Coptic Orthodox liturgics)) .--Isotope23 19:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Given the very short length of these articles, I personally believe that they are all going to be merged sooner or later into one article. Taking that into account, I think it might work best if the content on the feasts of the liturgical calendar were to be added to the existing article for each particular month, as that would both lengthen and improve that article and make it easier for people to see the content more quickly. I note that the Eastern Orthodox church has started individual pages for each day, and think the same thing may well happen to them as well. Given the staggering number of saints in the Catholic tradition, the same thing might not happen there immediately, although I personally intend to try to do it something soon, to again make it easier for readers to access more information more quickly. John Carter 15:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Egyptians

Marhaba, I understand your point. I know some Egyptians do not consider their self's as Arabs, especially Coptic people, but you can say many nevertheless do. It is really hard to define who is ethnically Arab and who isn't in modern Egypt although many Egyptians speak Arabic. Therefore you can not just say all the 75 million Egyptian are considered as Non-Arab. There was a major Arab population immigrated to Egypt after the rise of Islam who for instance built Cairo and obviously mixed with the native people of Egypt, also there was a large Greek population lived in Egypt before the Islamic conquest as well as Jews and other Semitic people. Not all people of modern Egypt are descended from the ancient Egyptian people. Any way this one theory to define Egyptians I totally respect you opinion although it is almost impossible to prove that some one is descended from a pharaoh grandfather, while in fact many Egyptians can be descended directly to one of the ancient Arabic tribes or families (such as ashraaf).I just wanted to say that the theory of considering the population of Egypt as Arab did not start from Nasser's era, It is really old theory to define a considerable number of Egyptians as Arabs (At least give the chance for the other opinion).The connection between Arabs and Egypt is much stronger than the relationship between Senegal and France, Argentina and Spain, and Austria and Germany. Egyptians or Arab Egyptians share history, Heritage, Culture and in some cases ethnical roots with Arab people of Arabia, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Morocco and other Arab countries. Thank you for your civilised discussion.--Aziz1005 17:52, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Giza.jpg

This image is clearly taken from Google Maps or Google Earth. Either Google or one of its image sources holds copyright on these images; they are never fair use outside the Google Maps or Google Earth articles. Also, please remember that taking a screenshot does not count as having created the image. Zetawoof(ζ) 04:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:WadiElNatrun.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:WadiElNatrun.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The Holy Synod of the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria

Dear Lanternix, I read your note re the Holy Synod and I made the appropriate adjustments, the parenthesis were removed at that time because they appeared red, so there was not page set up for these cities?, as for Theodosiopolis, I read it soemwhere in Wikipedia and it was relevant to El Menia regioan and it was an ancient greek name for a Christian center, I'll have to look for it again, there was not a page set up for it, but anyway I removed it till I can find the reference again and will let you know. I meant no offence for you in the first place. i would like to chat with you soon if it is ok for you. Let me know if you like to do that. User:Orthopraxia 12:39 PM Pacific Time, April 22, 2007

Dear Lanternix, You can reach me on my email"wassefm@msn.com", you can add me to windows messenger to enable the chat, or call me on my home phone (818)989-7682 if you live in the States. Just remember I am on the Pacific Time Zone. Talk to you soon. User:Orthopraxia 8:34 PM Pacific Time, April 23, 2007

Oxyrhynchus

An image that you uploaded, Image:Oxyrhynchus.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Chubbles 23:30, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikimania 2007

Hi Lanternix,

Wikimania 2007, which is being held in Taipei, Taiwan on August 3-5, is offering opportunities for travel scholarships to Wikimania for active users of Wikimedia projects from the continent of Africa. Although the original scholarship deadline has passed, please, if you are interested, you may still apply at Scholarships. Sincerely yours, Cary Bass15:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:AncientCopticPriest.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:AncientCopticPriest.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 16:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:MikhailElBatanony2.jpg listed for deletion

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:MikhailElBatanony2.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case[2][3]. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 02:17, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Question

Hi Lanternix! It would be hard to prove that his last edit was vandalism since he replaced it with another image rather than simply blank it, and he left a comment on the talk page about that before. It might be best to just talk it out on the discussion page. You can leave a message on the administrators' noticeboard, but they will probably tell you the same thing since this is a content dispute which happens very frequently on Wiki. However, I'll leave a note on his talk page. — Zerida 02:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:AIV Request

Thank you for making a report about Various usernames (talk · contribs · block log) on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. No final warning was issued. I left uw-vandal4 warnings on all the talk pages. Please resubmit a request if this continues. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) (Talk) 05:05, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Cut-and-paste moves

Hello there, Lanternix. Please take a look at Wikipedia:How to fix cut and paste moves, to see why cut-and-paste moves (such as those you made to several of the Egyptian governorate articles) should be avoided. If you need to move a page and can't (pre-existing redirect with edit history, or whatever), you can also list it on WP:RM. If you've done any more c&p moves that haven't been detected, perhaps you could be kind enough to tag them with {{Template:Db-histmerge}}, so we can recuperate those articles' edit histories. Regards, Bolivian Unicyclist 16:38, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. I tagged a fair number; I don't know if there's many more. Stay happy, Bolivian Unicyclist 18:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Fayum mummy portraits move

Hello, Lanternix. I've reverted your move of Fayum mummy portraits to Faiyum mummy portraits because it was not at all discussed. You placed it as an uncontroversial move at Wikipedia:Requested moves (it's unnecessary to list it there when there's no conflict with an existing page that requires the intervention of a moderator, btw), but you had not proposed it on the talk page of the portrait page or the governate's talk page. Please propose it on the relevant pages before making such moves in the future. Thank you.

P.S. I was incorrect when I said "very few" in my edit summary. I meant to say "fewer" ("Fayum" dominates, but "fayyum" isn't that much popular than "faiyum").— ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 19:40, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Egypt governorates.png

How did you create this, did you trace from a map or use an existing outline and fill it in and tilt it? --Golbez 18:22, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Faiyum

  • Hi, I have reverted your major undiscussed edit to Faiyum and Faiyum Governorate, which you made on the grounds that "Faiyum only means the town". For example, a short Google search for "Faiyum" will show many pages outside Wikipedia (e.g. http://www.grisel.net/faiyum.htm) that use the name Faiyum (or Fayyum or Fayum) to mean the whole of the Faiyum depression. Traditionally the name Faiyum (derived via Coptic from the Ancient Egyptian for "great water") meant Lake Moeris, or the depression that it lay in. Use of the name Faiyum for the town is quite recent: the town was formerly called Madīnat al Faiyūm = "the town of (= in) the Faiyum", and the town's name being shortened to only Faiyum is recent. Please discuss this. Anthony Appleyard 16:41, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:AlexFlag.gif

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:AlexFlag.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:01, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Re Copt

Hey FayssalF; I just wanted to apologize for reverting your edits on Copts. I hadn't seen what you wrote on the talk page. Sorry again, and thanks for helping with this. --Lanternix 14:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

No problems at all. Happy editing. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 15:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Flag again

Lanternix: Why, pray tell, does Copt still have a bogus flag of Egypt with a cross and an eagle?!!! — Zerida 03:58, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Governorate of Egypt

I just got back from a looooooong conference, but I got the message and I will take a look into it as soon as I can, unless the issue has been resolved in the meantime? sincerely Gryffindor 14:36, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Banned user

Hi Lanternix! So as you can see, the pages have been semi-protected for two days and most of the socks have been indef blocked. If after the protection expires the vandalism persists (which I am fairly certain it will), feel free to put in another request for page protection at WP:RFP. Also, if he keeps uploading the bogus flags, please tag for speedy-deletion the way I did and refer to the incident report I filed or file a new one. Hopefully by now more admins will have the pages on their watchlists. Cheers, — Zerida 23:38, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey, no problem! You know, I actually didn't pay much attention to the sites he posted since several were clearly created by him just to make a point; I was simply reverting a banned user who is no longer allowed to edit Wikipedia, either in the mainspace or on talk pages. Now that I read your response though, I took a more thorough look and WOW! To think that someone, who is without any doubt neither Coptic nor Egyptian judging by his contribution history [4], would go to such great lengths for being banned from Wikipedia makes me feel sorry for him (although it's also almost comical that he would go that far). I just feel bad for any Coptic community activists whose work might be trivialized by these internet crackpots. Well, I guess he won't be any happier now that I am going to propose that the rest of his original research be deleted. But hey, I am way too excited about the Hatshepsut announcement to care about what he says about me right now. Dr. Hawass is mentioned on the Main Page today by the way. Cheers, — Zerida 05:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Hatshepsut

This article [5] suggests the diagnosis for diabetes was made based on a DNA test. Given that the mummy was identified through dentition, I suspect the disease's effects would have been obvious on the teeth. If you do find more information, let me know. The National Geographic has a nice general article [6] with photos and a video (though a little gory). — Zerida 02:59, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunate edit summary on Arab

The term "Semitic peoples" is acceptable to be included in the article, but the term "Semite" itself is not acceptable when referring to a modern context (as opposed to ancient history)... AnonMoos 15:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

"Semite" as a noun really has no meaning in a modern context, unless you're an obsolete race theorist constructing archetypes of the "Alpine", "Nordic", "Mediterranean" and "Semitic" so-called "races" by measuring brachycephalic and dolichocephalic skulls. AnonMoos 16:06, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Where is "Semite" used as a noun in a modern context (not "Semitic" used as an adjective, which is something entirely different) in the article on the Semitic language group? AnonMoos 16:16, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria

Hi, sorry that I put what may be a misnomer in Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria, but I was trying to clarify what may be taken as an ambiguous statement. I feel that "mother church" doesn't mean a whole lot in English and can be a little confusing. May I perhaps suggest replacing "mother church" with "largest Christian church"? It is clear, avoids any "point of view" issues, and still imparts the importance of the church in Egypt to an international audience. Paxsimius 04:26, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and changed it, and rewrote the paragraph a little to make it more encyclopedic while still stressing that it is an Egyptian church at its roots and not brought in from somewhere else. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that was the point of the original meaning of the sentence (I think). If there is a factual problem with the first paragraph, please let me know. Paxsimius 13:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
And thanks for catching my typo on Copt. I guess when I was fixing the link I messed up the text. I'm glad someone's watching me! Just so you know what I'm doing, I'm helping with the Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links project, right now concentrating on pages that link to the disambiguation page for Coptic. Some of these pages are quite a chore. Paxsimius 19:48, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Maamoura Beach, Alexandria

I see you have changed the article's namespace and made some edits, but as a result when you search Maamoura you dont get in the results page except Alexandria with a relevance of 2.2%, how can this be fixed. And another thing, I've made some external references links on the article, is this considered citing? note that I didn't use the {{cite}} tag anywhere in the article. ñÅñÑüTalk 09:38, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Map of Egypt restored

11-July-2007: The ID "User:Lanternix" was logged as overwriting a map of Egypt developed by the American CIA, on 19-May-2007 at 1:09 a.m, which has been restored. It is a violation of Wikipedia policy to store unsourced images in the Wikipedia servers, with false background or non-matching information. Each image must be uploaded to a new image-name with accurate source information provided to match the particular image. See WP:POLICY. -Wikid77 06:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:StMarkcoptic.jpg

{{subst:expimsrc|Image:StMarkcoptic.jpg}}, You state PD, but without source this can't be confirmed. If it's relgious iconography it MAY be old enough to be PD in any event. ShakespeareFan00 15:22, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

If it's self created, No worries :), You should state that in the image summary though :). "Photograph of self created religous icon"

for example. ShakespeareFan00 15:29, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Arab

Hi Lanternix. I am sorry for the mess we are going thru lately. I am neither a POV pusher and nor you are. But there is some kind of common sense at least. When we say "refuse" we must say why and how, etc... (as i said on my edit summary). We can't just throw words randomly. We strive for a balance. Much of my work here in Wikipedia has been referencing and you can check that yourselves. So at the absence of sources we at least try to be as much NPOV as possible. When we say "refuse" we mean someone imposed that on someone else. It has been the case but it is not a general phenomenon. Do you know for instance about the differences between Moroccan Berbers and Algerian Berbers? If yes than great. If not than there is a huge difference. To back up my claims i'd refer you to the case of Morocco. Berbers, though some are proud Moroccans, never said or claimed they refused something. I myself can't tell you if i am an Arab or a Berber indeed. I am a Moroccan. Have you ever heard of some clashes between Arabs and Berbers in Morocco? Never. So? Who refused and who accepted? No one. thanks. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 02:27, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Coptic alphabet

Hi Lanternix. In the Coptic dab page I moved the alphabet listing up mostly for consistency; in the dab pages for Ge'ez, Demotic, Latin (disambiguation), Gothic and Greek the listing for the alphabet is part of the disambiguation and not in a "see also" section. I agree with you that the term "Coptic" doesn't usually refer to the alphabet, but the same can be argued for the others as well (except for maybe Greek). Please reconsider? Paxsimius 13:20, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Please explain why, on the Coptic dab page, you keep moving Coptic alphabet down into the See Also section from the reference section. Another user, Urhixidur, has also moved it into the reference section, as I have tried to do. I have given an argument as to why it should be in the reference section (consistency with other language/alphabet dab pages). I understand your argument that the term "Coptic" usually doesn't refer to the alphabet, and I even agree with you, but the same can be said for these other languages that I mentioned earlier and, in fact, the only exception to this style that I can find is Coptic. It is clear that Wikipedia style dictates that Coptic alphabet belongs in the upper reference section. Please explain your actions. Paxsimius 01:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I'm not trying to pick a fight with you or anything, and I want to make this work. You said that the term "Coptic" doesn't usually refer just to the alphabet. I agree. However, all the other like pages have the alphabet next to the language. My question is, why should the Coptic dab page be different? All I am asking for is a little consistency in style across articles. This has nothing to do with Coptic specifically.
First, an apology. I somehow missed your message of July 25 on my talk page where you explained yourself in more detail. What you say is valid, but one point still stands: only in Coptic are you trying to make the alphabet sit in the "see also" section. However, I can see what the problem is; Coptic has a huge "see also" section that a lot of things have been placed into. I'm not sure if that is bad or good, and I'm not about to touch it. As a compromise, I offer the following for the top section:

Coptic may refer to:

As I have been going through pages fixing links to the Coptic dab page, I found that the vast majority referred to the language, a sizable portion of them referred to the Copt people, and a small handful to the alphabet (which is why my attention was drawn to this) and almost none to anything else. I found that this was basically true for the Ge'ez page until an admin changed it into a redirect; most references to the language with a few to the alphabet. I'm sorry I can't supply any ready examples; it would take some effort in going back through edits. I feel that this compromise still makes the link to the alphabet page readily available without being lost the "see also section" but doesn't elevate it to the same level as the language and the people. I also feel that other editors won't feel the need to change this as two others have recently done. Is this okay with you? Paxsimius 03:09, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Lanternix, myself not being a Copt, I agree that the Coptic alphabet should be at the top of the dab page. Whenever I think of Coptic, I think of the alphabet and the language, and I'm sure there are many others who do too. This is an encycopedia to learn. Not for those who already know the answers. When I think of Gothic, I don't think of the alphabet, so using that as one example is not the same. If it were not for Wikpedia I wouldn't have known that people considered themselves Coptic. Gaelic is a language, but Irish people are quite more often known as Irish than Gaelic. - Jeeny Talk 03:39, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
It's nice to see you trying to save face after your shameless wikistalking got reported. Yourself "not being a Copt" and have zero understanding of this issue, and nothing to offer to this page or other ones about Egypt should stick to the race stuff you like so much. I hope you can learn from this lesson. Egyegy 04:20, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Okay, for those following this (which I'm kind of surprised about), Lanternix and I have agreed upon the above compromise that we're going to work with. It shows that the alphabet is a subset of the language that doesn't necessarily rank for its own freestanding listing, but allows for a quick reference for those with little understanding what Coptic means. As with all the great compromises, no one is entirely happy, but it's something everyone can live with. I hope others who have been following this will also honor this compromise. Paxsimius 21:34, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi

since you are an Egyptian i wonder if you can help me on something, i don't belive that Egpyians are an ethnic group well the Christians may be but not Egypt as it whole. i wonder if you could helpo me to propose a merger on the "Egyptian poeple" article or i could be wrong then i would hope u cud corect me thank you. Nochi 15:53, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Blocked for 3RR

You have been blocked for violating the three-revert rule at Saint Maurice. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. The duration of the block is 48 hours. Seraphimblade Talk to me 11:24, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Saint Maurice, etc.

Hi Lanternix- I'll have a look at Saint Maurice. As for the other articles, I've never really edited them although I pop in every now and then to check on their status. I've learned long ago to steer clear of them as they are usually not worth the effort of writing factual Egyptological information about the topic, just to have it substantially replaced with original research taken from web sites or 19th century works overnight. That said, I took a look at them right now and they are not as bad as I had expected, though it's a quote farm. Some of the material is actually copied directly from Egyptians#Origins but slightly misrepresented/ORed with an Afrocentric slant. I don't know if I'll ever be inclined to edit these articles, though maybe in the future if they get wider community attention. — Zerida 05:34, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Lanternix, mon ami racotien. Just saw the last message deleted by Egyegy from your talk page. Don't take it to heart -- on Wiki, this is another drop in a bucket. The best thing to do with trolling is to ignore it. Problems with Afrocentric POV-pushing are pretty old, but they are actually not as bad now as they used to be. Just have a look at the talk page archive of Ancient Egypt. I've been working on the main Egypt articles for a while now, making sure they remain factually accurate, and I find that these things almost come with the territory. You also have all the "ancient astronaut" theories to deal with. Will see if I can get to the population one eventually; perhaps we could all collaborate on them sometime. Happy editing, and please don't forget 3RR. It's not worth getting blocked over a content dispute -- you can always ask other editors to provide a third opinion, or you can post on one of the WikiProjects that deal with these topics (like Egypt, Oriental Orthodoxy, etc.) Best, — Zerida 00:05, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Zerida that the best thing to do is to ignore the troll. I was told the same thing on the administrator board. Trolls love conflict. They just want to get a reaction from you of course. Look how he's been trolling around other people's pages egging them on [7] [8] [9]. He can't help himself because all he wants is attention and we don't give it to him because we really don't care what he does if he doesn't bother us. That's the problem with all the afrocentrics. They are obsessed with us and our history and country, but we couldn't care less about them or theirs. Just find me more than a handful of Egyptians who can pick out Ethiopia or Nigeria on a map. I Googled that forum that the vandals on Egyptian articles keep mentioning. Apparently it's a a real Hate site led by a Tuareg guy pretending to be Egyptian and spreading all kinds of lies about our country to his American Black friends. You should see the filth on that page. A bunch of people foaming at the mouth everyday about us and our "genetics". It's really pathetic. They think these Nubians in the white gallabiyas are "Upper Egyptians" [10]. I guess that's how they can sleep at night. Do you know that the picture of the man that says "Coptic man" is a Thai Muslim? That's right a THAI!! That's how pathetically desperate they are of course. Not that there's anything wrong with being Nubian, they are some of the closest people to us, and I think Mohamed Mounir is a god, but these clueless afrocentrics, who have nothing to do with the Nubians either, think this is what Upper Egyptians look like. My parents are from Sohag originally and the real Sa3yda there can knock some reall sense into them if they actually make it to Upper Egypt. By the way, I agree with Lanternix that we need to get those articles in order if they are spreading inaccuracies. Don't forget that he kept trying to vandalize a quote from a study on the Egyptians page before, so he's probably doing the same thing in other places. Egyegy 05:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks guys. Egyegy, you got me cracked up with that information about the Thai Muslim guy :D:D:D I can't believe they went that far! And Zerida, je suis impressione' par le fait que tu as re'alise' que je suis Racotien ;) I think we should just keep an eye on the guy for now and monitor his contributions to articles pertaining to Egypt. All the best to you both and thanks once again :) --Lanternix 04:13, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
You are doing the same thing as you accuse others of. On the Appearance of the ancient Egyptians‎, you said you revert because the information wasn't referenced, yet it was. But your contribution "Egypt for millennia depended on the flooding of the Nile to bring fertility to the land, and the resulting soil was very black." has no reference. I'm not denying that may be true, but when you have someone who adds context and it's backed up with a source, you need to do the same with your edits. If you find a reference for that statement, then added it back, with a source. It's not us against them. Everyone has a POV, it's all about reliable sources to back up statements. So both sides need to be sure that the text they add is supported by a reliable, verifiable source. Instead of all this detective work on who are the "trolls", reporting them, scrutinizing there contributions, etc. Spend THAT time doing research to find the proper citations. Thanks. - Jeeny Talk 17:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Saint Maurice and Appearance of Egyptians

Thank you for your work in these articles. The Afrocentrists are delusional people who cannot be reasoned with.

I found these nice pictures of Saint Maurice: http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/ncd05189.jpg http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/saintm32.jpg Source: http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/saintm32.htm

And this is about Ramses II: http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/041129/041129_coslog_bcol2_2p.standard.jpg http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6614215/

I would have added them myself but I don't know about that copyright stuff.

All the best, MoritzB 15:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:StMaurice2.jpg, by Taharqa (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:StMaurice2.jpg is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:StMaurice2.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 19:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Request

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Saint Maurice, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Saint Maurice.
For the Mediation Committee, Daniel 12:18, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Saint Maurice pic

Hey man, can you make sure you re-upload the Egyptian icon? The afrocentric edit-warrior made a bogus claim about copyright so it got deleted. Egyegy 06:50, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Copyvio St Maurice Fanous image again

Once again you have uploaded an image (probably 2) that are clearly stated to be copyright of Fanous. You are not Fanous (are you?) so your copyright declaration is false. These will of course not survive, so don't bother adding them anywhere. Johnbod 18:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Permission given by owner. Please check your talk page. --Lanternix 18:35, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
I see you have corrected the copyright notice. Johnbod 18:40, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
It looks fine to me, but I'm not a specialist. I should think its ok. Johnbod 18:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
It's a personal website. He cannot give permission to images that are not his own, just because he has them on a personal site. I'm not trying to be stubborn for it's sake. I'm tired of the conspiracy theories, and the lack of compromise. - Jeeny Talk 19:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't know, but I note the owner of the website has the same surname as the artist (who died Jan 2007 - see Isaac Fanous). Johnbod 19:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Even so, the icon is a contemporary artist's depiction of St Maurice who was from ancient times. Because he is the artist, does that mean it actually represents St Maurice? - Jeeny Talk 19:56, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Coptic art is very traditional, so at least, in the absence so far of older images, that seems likely to represent the traditional Coptic view. The books say the black St M is from Catholic Europe only, from 12th century or whatever. His actual historical appearance, if in fact he existed (which from a secular historical viewpoint seems unlikely), is really a different matter. Johnbod 20:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

You should check this

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum;f=8

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lanternix/Archive_1&oldid=1143128125"