User talk:Deeceevoice/Archive 1

Here are some tips to help you get started:

If you haven't already, please add your name to the new user log to let others know a little about yourself.
Read the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the Sandbox.
Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk or ask me on my talk page.
Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!
Jrdioko

P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).

Your welcome basket

Well if you insist, here's your welcome basket, Wikipedia style:

Some fresh fruit
Ghirardelli squares with lots of caramel

Enjoy! – Jrdioko (Talk) 05:58, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Talk:Eddie Murphy

Perhaps you would like to add a comment to the debate on this page. Rmhermen 16:35, Aug 2, 2004 (UTC)

Jazzy Welcome

A belated welcome from me as well. I'm glad to have you on board! I'll no doubt be seeing you around jazz related articles. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 18:20, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Jacking in from African American

Welcome. I had a bit of response about race riot over in Talk:African American, but I thought I'd add something here as well. I really admire the combination of cold rage and cold hard facts that you've put into that article.

I wonder what you think of blackface. I put a lot of stuff into that that confused people, but I think it has held up against the mind-numbers. The scale of injustice may not be quite the same, but I had some hassles straightening out the redneck article (my people, sort of), which was nothing but stupid jokes when I got there. Really stupid jokes.

Is there a black venue where you could promote Wikipedia contribution? Something online? Good luck, anyway. Ortolan88 22:50, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

PS-later -- I appreciate your thoughtfulness and compliments re blackface, but it has caused me to think more about perhaps starting an article on black influence on popular culture. You probably don't hate Elvis as much as I hate Led Zeppelin, but these white guys (including me) really do love black music. I sound kind of black when I sing, because almost all the singers I like are black. Such an article could wrap up lots of stuff, particularly the profound influence of black musicians on country music, where many of the greatest names had black mentors, Elvis (Ike Turner), Hank Williams, Carl Perkins, etc. I'm just making notes here, but I observe that white jazz musicians for the most part do not try to do the Mick Jagger thing, but simply play and let the show-biz stuff go, but that goes for black jazz musicians too. I'll let you know when I start anything.

As for black venues, how about fraternities and sororitys? Keep on keeping on, Ortolan88 23:24, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

More on Blackface/Ortolan

Hey, Ortolan *waving*. Sorry to be so late responding, but I'm a techno-idiot and just figured out how to do this. I like, pretty much, the most recent changes to African American. (I'm even warming to the divisions.) I took a look at your piece on blackface and made some changes. However, I removed the stuff about white artists covering black artists, because it's simply not blackface. Yeah, it's white folks stealing black music and/or mimicking performance styles, but it's not the same -- and, I think, somewhat diminishes the value of the black innovators being ripped off. Instead, I stuck in a quote which, perhaps, says more succinctly what you may have had in mind. I think you did a respectable job with the subject, and I'm glad you tackled it.

As far as getting more black folks to contribute to Wikipedia, I don't know anyone. Most of my friends and associates are activisits who, frankly, have better, more real-world things to do -- battles to fight, wrongs to right -- that kinda stuff. I did once make mention of Wikipedia on BlackPlanet a long while back, but that place has turned into such a cesspool, I think another mention would simply attract vandalism. What can ya do? Peace. deeceevoice 17:48, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Went back and reread, then restored your cover stuff. Thought it important (I hate Elvis!) and noticed the language about "admiration." Cool. :-) deeceevoice 22:33, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I've gone back and even more substantially reworked, rewritten and expanded blackface to include its racist iconography and impact on American culture. I had to -- particularly after noting the igorance/naivete of some of the comments in the discussion thread. Besides, IMO, it's too important in the shaping of the American psyche (how I wanted to use that word, but I figured some ignorant asshole would flag it as violating NPOV) shouldn't be treated as merely as an entertainment phenomenon. Let me know what you think. Peace. deeceevoice 15:47, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hadn't heard from you on my recent extensive rewrite/edits to blackface after posting the above notes to your page. So, I thought I'd post them here. deeceevoice 00:41, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Welcome aboard.

Hi,

I am enjoying, and agreeing with, your comments on the race page. That article was the third thing I looked at on Wikipedia (after spiders and carrier pigeons -- both topics on which hard-bound encyclopedias regularly mess up). Wow! It started with a fight with somebody who was really interested in preserving the idea of race as a real thing out there in the real world. It's gotten a lot better than it was at that time, but it is one of those articles that we are going to have to watch forevermore because people will come in and "fix" it to suit what they think they know. Fortunately, although a couple of the current contributors are IMHO tactless, I don't think anybody is currently not operating in good faith or with a crimped intellect.

One thing I've noticed is that if I do not let my ego get involved I can be much more effective in securing changes over the long run. The other thing is that if we once get something said exactly right it has its own power and can pretty much take care of itself because most of the people who might change a poorer version of the same truth on the basis of their own thinking are actually educated by the article, see the justice in the way the matter is explained, and therefore let it alone.

Once in a while you will find the glorious exception to general Wikipedia practice, somebody who disagrees with you, maybe wants to change something you've put much effort into, actually reads your response and then says, "Now I understand. And the article should also reflect more clear that other thing you just wrote." Maybe you, too, will have the pleasure of bumping into Fenice somewhere on these virtual pages. Pat (P0M 11:23, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC))

P.S. On your most recent edit to the talk page for the Race article I think you ticked the "This is a minor edit" box. Ordinarily people only use that if they made no substantive change (i.e., fixed a spelling error, added a comma). It helps people who are seriously interested in an article, however, to know when a significant change has occurred, so if there is any doubt in my mind I left it unchecked. That way nobody will flame me for messing with their perfect prose. ;-)

"Talk"

When you get to the user page, just click on the "discussion" tab, and then click "edit this page" (or click the + symbol to add something new. (Hope that answers your question, I am a bit of a newbie too) Guettarda 19:13, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Racism at Wikipedia?

Have you happened to come across an Egyptologist here? There's a statement at Talk:List of interracial, interethnic or intercultural couples that I was going to just leave but I think I should speak to it, or visitors will just assume it to be true.

Can you also look at Talk:Black British usage and tell me if you think this person was attempting a joke? [Deeceevoice seems to think I'm overly sensitive ;)]

Quill 22:26, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Response at Quill's page Quill 21:21, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Appreciation and Question and Request

Firstly, appreciated your tremendous improvements to soul food. I have two questions in that regard. 1) Do you think that "fat back" should be added, or at least mentioned. 2)Do you think that cabbage ought to be mentioned as a common ingredient in chow-chow? Another request (based on your screen name): Would you consider looking at my article District of Columbia home rule with an eye to improving it? It's been several years since I lived in the District area, but the idea of citizens of the U.S. mainland being essentially unrepresented in Congress and without effective control over their municiapl government is still pretty disturbing, and seemed to need its own article with a slightly different emphasis (more historical) than the good section on the Washington, DC page. Thanks! Rlquall 15:22, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

For the record:

I'm not Japanese. I have lived in the United States almost all of my life. Right now, I live in North Philadelphia and walk up Broad Street every day, through the heart of one of America's largest black communities. I don't profess to be an expert on African-American culture, but I have studied ethnography and world cultures for years, and I have worked on a number of diversity-related projects in my predominantly Afro-Caribbean high school and in my higher education. Your assumptions about my background are therefore entirely false.

I'm not mad at you, but I suggest that you exercise slightly better judgment in the future if you want people to take you seriously. In fact, I strongly suggest that you re-read Pat's note above. It's entirely true and it will probably save you a great many unnecessary fights. Name-calling does not win on Wikipedia; facts win on Wikipedia. - Sekicho 21:56, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)

"Name-calling"? WHAT name calling? Secondly, I have some advice for you. Before you crticize an article in which many people have invested a great deal of time and effort, it might help if you took time to READ it. (It would save you the trouble of writing paragraphs and paragraphs of crap -- and then going back and deleting them, as you've done.) Further, you're welcome for the patient advice I extended to you -- despite your obvious attitude. Thirdly, you say you've studied ethnography for a number of years. Yet you presume to say (and quite erroneously) that African-Americans are not an ethnic group? Amazing. Not only have you lived here all your life, but you've studied to be so abysmally clueless. LOL Further, I already am taken seriously on Wikipedia, thank you very much. I've made numerous contributions to several subjects dealing with African-Americans that, IMO, have made them far better than they would have been without my input. And that's a fact. :-p deeceevoice 22:31, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Etymology of "hip" and "dig" in Hipster

I noticed that you changed the statements about the etymology of "hip" and "dig" in Hipster to state that the "likely" origin is from Wolof. From some cursory research, it looks like these hypotheses are due to Prof. Clarence Major of UC Davis, but are very far from being broadly accepted. Is there particular scientific evidence you know of that renders these substantially "likelier" than the various other alternative etymologies that have been proposed?

I understand that this topic may be somewhat political, since all of us who are descended from relatively small ethnic groups (myself included) are wont to take some amount of pride in evidence of English borrowing from our ancestral language. However, as a linguist (by training), I'm wary of statements as fact (or as "likely" fact) of etymologies that are not established as such (by the proper standards of the linguistic community, which are substantially more rigorous than folk etymologies might have you believe). Zyqqh 19:10, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It's got nothing to do with wishful thinking. There are lots of words Africa has contributed to the English language via African-American input. The hipster argot originated with black jazz musicians and the use of AAVE. Certain slang words were merely appropriated by white hangers on. It is far more likely that "dig" is from Wolof than from Irish because of the cultural milieu in which it is in evidence -- along with the fact that there are other slang words in AAVE -- also in use in hipster argot -- that are African in origin. Jazz is an African-American creation. The "fraternity," if you will, of black jazz musicians had its origins in areas of the country and at a time in which the black community was still highly insular/segregated/separated and in many ways was still highly Africanized -- Thelonius Monk, for instance, jumping up from the piano and shuffling around counterclockwise. The moments of the sun.

Irish? That's a real stretch -- and certainly far less likely than African origins. If you have another source for "hep cat," I'd certainly be interested in hearing it. deeceevoice 19:47, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
Multi-Licensing Guide
Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

A note about the changes in the AAVE article

Thank you so much for contributing while I'm making such massive changes.

Here's the story. As an agreement with my linguistics professor, in leu of a paper on AAVE, I decided to fill the Wikipedia articles on the subject, since Wikipedia is my new thang. However, as is typical, I procrastinated a bit too long, and am now scouring whatever sources I have to get content into the page, so I have something to show. Some of it may be naïve or even outright wrong, but I'm trying as hard as I can to root what I say in respected fact and from an NPOV.

Anyway, thanks for proof-reading. :-) If I say something stupid, you don't have to bother to ask me what I meant, as I probably just overgeneralized from my hasty reading.

Thanks, Luqui 22:48, 2004 Dec 10 (UTC)

US music

Hi, I was wondering if you might be willing to give some thoughts on music of the United States, especially the section on black "roots" music. The article is already at 32k, so we can't put much more info in (and, of course, there is aleady an article on African American music itself), but it could use some TLC from someone who knows more, especially about blackface minstrelsy. I'd like to nominate US music as a featured article soon, so I'm trying to get everything tidied up. Thanks! Tuf-Kat 17:24, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

Hey, Tuf-Kat! Been seein' your work around Wikipedia. You a real music freak aincha, bwoi? :-p Well, I took a real quick look at only portions of some article subtopics, and I see problems all over the place. IMO, while the piece may be basically sound (I don't know; as I said, I haven't read it), from a quick look, I'd say this is a long way from bein' ready for prime time -- and not just the section on black roots music. I'd really like to help out, but stuff always seems to pile up just before the holidays, and this time is no exception. I just don't have time right now. How 'bout holding off 'til after the new year? It really does need some serious work in the black folks department.

You might want to invite User:Ortolan88 to comment on the piece. Based on his attempts with blackface, he seems to be a guy with some decent knowledge and appropriate (kind of) sensibilities when it comes to at least some of the later-era stuff vis-a-vis black folks. I'm not inviting him in, 'cause this is "your" thing; you decide. Don't know if he got the ass 'cause I extensively rewrote his piece (after he asked me in on it) or what, but dat bwoi jus' won't write me back! :-p But I think he may have some interesting/useful contributions, in general, as well.

Peace 2 u. deeceevoice 12:50, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Mau Mau Uprising

Thanks! The old article was definitely an embarrassment. I was just going to ignore it, but I couldn't get its sheer awfulness out of my head. It's basically jigsawed into my own contribution and there's still some cringeworthy stuff worthy of a massive edit, but at least it doesn't seem to conjure up images of the grass-skirt clad natives at the beginning of King Kong anymore. ;) p.s. K=Kalorama? BanyanTree 04:27, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Blackface references

Where are you getting your information from? Unless we get some references we can't really make it a featured article, and I'd like to see it as one as its well written (apart from the headings!) Ta bu shi da yu 12:42, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks mate :) I do appreciate your kind words! I'm always impressed by how encouraging people can be on this site, especially to people who aren't doing so well. I'm in a much better state now so I'll be reverting back. It's good to know that people are very kind on this site though :-) Anyway, I'd love to see some references and I'd love to see your hard work and well researched and written article get recognition around here! Apart from the fact that it'll make the article a lot more "solid" (not sure if that's the right term). Not sure if I agree about the comment on articles that hit featured article status, but I appreciate your honesty! If you have any specific objections to a specific article let me know and I'll see if we can get our FAC crew to look into them for us :-) Ta bu shi da yu 14:02, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Deeceevoice, I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed Blackface. It's a great read, very well written, very interesting. I've put my support for it on the page. Don't be discouraged! I've self-nominated two articles for Featured Article status now (so far, one has made it; I'm still working to improve the second). Both were heavily criticized to start with, and I know what that feels like when you've put a lot of work into something. It's gut-wrenching. But it's tough out there! Try to incorporate some of the objections; argue with the ones you really don't agree with; try to reach a compromise. Provide good references. It's a pain in the neck but you'll make it. Your article IS the best of Wikipedia and it deserves that label. Slim 10:12, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)

Bias and Equal Protection

Couldn't agree with you more that there's systemic bias on Wikpedia. Glad you are trying to fix that; don't get discouraged; keep it up.

Apropos of this, are you interested in working on Equal Protection Clause with me? I don't know if you have any interest in the law at all, but if you do, please join me; the history of legal discrimination against minorities in the U.S. is a topic that has not yet gotten adequate treatment on Wikipedia. Hydriotaphia 20:13, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. One question, though—when you wrote, "When skimming the article, I was led to inquire about institutional racism and found it just appallingly abominable in so many ways -- not to mention itself racist as hell," were you talking about the article on institutional racism or the article on the Equal Protection Clause? If it was the latter, please do tell me. Best, Hydriotaphia 15:23, Dec 19, 2004 (UTC)

Oh, disregard the above; it's clear to me now that institutional racism was what you were talking about (at least so it seems to me). Jesus H. Christ, that article was absolutely awful before you got a hold of it. Uff da, as my people say. Especially horrible was that BS about the "far left." My personal take on all of this, though you may disagree, is that it's not so much racism as it is the kind of selfish and ridiculous libertarianism that is found everywhere on the internet among white people who for utterly foolish reasons have come to believe that they're being persecuted. But perhaps that's naive of me, and it's just straight-up racism. At any rate I really hope you won't give up on this. Can't stress enough how happy I am that you're here. Hydriotaphia 16:08, Dec 19, 2004 (UTC)

Hey, deeceevoice, I've got yet another favor to ask of you. Could you

Look over my Equal Protection Clause article when you have time, and if you support it, please add your support at the Featured article candidates page?
If you don't support it, please lay your criticisms on me!
I'm afraid that people are going to give me sh*t for my account of affirmative action in the article—not NPOV, etc. etc. Tell me what you think of it.

Hmm, this has turned into favors, not just one favor. Well—you don't have to do all of these things, obviously. (Or any of them, for that matter!) Happy holidays, Hydriotaphia 00:44, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

WP:3RR on Modern anti-Semitism - 24 hour block

Really. We mean it about the three-revert rule. Doing a complicated version to try to get around it doesn't get around it either.

Please try to get along with others better. Probably the hardest thing on Wikipedia is how to work effectively with people who are actually complete dickheads - you'll break a molar gritting your teeth - but it's pretty much the most important social skill here - David Gerard 22:00, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

"Break a molar gritting your teeth"? You're kidding -- right? Did I somehow give the impression that I take all this that seriously? No. I won't/don't play nice w/"dickheads," and I don't dance for anyone. I've been shut down for 24 hours so many times when it had nothing to do with me, that this doesn't even begin to faze me. I think my revisions were fitting and proper. If Wikipedia wants to be intimidated by a handful of hypersensitive, Zionist azzholes who can't stand to read a differing opinion, then that's pretty pathetic. But, then, that's pretty much par for the course, isn't it? deeceevoice 01:34, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It really isn't helpful to characterise editors as "Zionist azzholes who can't stand to read a differing opinion..." Please do try to get along with others better. Thank you.

Unless and until you can identify yourself, keep your advice to yourself. I wonder if you favored David Gerard with similar counsel with regard to his use of "dickheads". *snorting with contempt* Don't waste my time. deeceevoice 07:04, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hello. Please provide an edit summary. Thanks and happy edits. Hyacinth 02:16, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Also, remember edit summaries don't replace discussion pages. When someone addresses changes on an article's talk page, it's customary to respond there, not by reverting and putting comments only in the edit. That's how revert wars start. Thank you.

Martin Luther King, Sr.

I don't know if this will interest you, but this sub-stub has been given a Vote for Deletion. If you have an opinion one way or t'other, can you register your vote here:

this page's entry I'm not good at linking, so if that doesn't work can you go to the article page and follow the link that says "this page's entry", if you're so inclined? And/or if you know anything about "Daddy King" you could add it to the stub. I will add what pathetically little I know. Thanks. Quill 22:41, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Support

Keep up the good work DC. We need more of us AAs contributing to Internet media such as this. You're not alone. I've just started to take this site seriously and if we don't spend all of our time watching the AA wiki pages, we should have time to add knowledge as well. Take care. sundance 09:17, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the good wishes. Yep. The ignorance and outright racism on this site are rampant (no surprise there :-p). You don't seem to have a personal page, so I have no means of contacting you. Perhaps, you'll see this note. Peace 2 u. deeceevoice 07:49, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I'm here but I've seen the remarks on your page so I haven't bothered to set mine up yet...sundance 02:11, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Additionally, I'm going to start searching and adding all the AA and A person's of history that I can find to this encyclopedia. I'd also recommend reviewing the existing biographies contained in this site for biased or slanted descriptions. I found that the Desmond Tutu entry in WPedia contained a wholly slanted description of his political views that only focused on 'middle eastern' concerns and nothing on S. Africa, which is where he's spent virtually all of his political energy! sundance 02:40, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Nothing on this website would surprise me. You should have seen the entry on institutional racism. If you're more computer savvy that I (not hard; I'm a techno-idiot) and have a decent photo that is in the public domain, or to which you own the rights, please add one to dreadlocks. They had a photo of some white bwoi's tired imitation of them. (Typical of the kind of shyt on this site: an article on dreads, and they post a photo of a white bwoi.) I posted a request on BlackPlanet for someone to substitute a proper one, and I think someone tried. They removed the original photo, but succeeded only in inserting the Wiki photo template logo. We need a pic of the real deal, something black and beautiful (the blacker, the nappier, the more well-groomed, the better) -- if/when you have the time.

By the way, I'm a blackwoman. Peace 2 u, brother. deeceevoice 07:05, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Oops, I've corrected my reference to your person. Thanks. sundance aka objective 07:27, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, but not a big deal; ideas are ideas. I just thought it worth setting the record straight. :-) I don't know if I wanna spend "all" my time on this site; it's not that critical. But I do check regularly to see/correct what kind of nonsense/lies are being written about the race. I've found there are some folks here who mean well, but precious fewer who really have a clue about us, our history, our culture (even among other black contributors). And if the white/Asian contributors aren't blatantly racist (didja see my little love note below?/kinda pathetic that some azzhole like that actually believes such words have any impact, like I'm lookin' for validation -- and in the eyes of the enemy, no less. Shee-it. lol), many of them seem intentionally obtuse. And then, of course, there's the usual arrogance. (But what else is new?) SOS. :-p deeceevoice 09:16, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

For the Racists, a Place to Call Your Very Own

You may as well leave your comments here. This is where they'll end up, anyway. deeceevoice 16:30, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

ur a dead nigger -- anonymous note, 31 Jan 2005

Um, nope. Wrong on both counts. But you're most definitely a coward and a fool. KMBA. lol :-p deeceevoice 20:09, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

"die nigger die" -- 70.88.129.205, 2 Jan 2005

die nigger die -- a reprise from 70.88.129.205, 2 Feb 2005

African American

Thanks for sticking up for RickK - admins catch a lot of flack, so we appreciate support. (And also, as I'm sure I don't need to point out to you, bogus claims of bias/racism are bad because they devalue the real ones...)

Also, yes, I deleted "claim" because I was concerned that it might be misread in the "purported/specious" sense, and I wanted to make it a simple statement of fact. (I thought about changing it to "proudly claim", but that would have been potentially inaccurate as I have no data to show that it's generally true.) I put in "some" to make it plain that there's a mix (as opposed to 'pure' "European, Native American or Asian ancestry", which is one literally correct reading of the sentence without it, although it's obviously an illogical one). Also, I would have stayed with "or", because I don't know that all African-Americans with some mixed ancestry have all three in their background. (I suppose that technically the most correct would be the horrible "and/or" - I forget, is the logical "and/or" included in the normal English reading of "or"? Clearly the engineer in me is showing through! :-). Noel (talk) 16:19, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

PS: I don't usually check other User_talk: pages (so that I don't have to monitor a whole long list of User_Talk: pages - one for each person with whom I am having a "conversation"), so please leave any messages for me on my talk page (above); if you leave a message for me here I probably will not see it. I know not everyone uses this style (they would rather keep all the text of a thread in one place), but I simply can't monitor all the User_talk: pages I leave messages on. Thanks!

Well, you may not have viewed it as "sticking up for" him (although I would certainly view saying "the passages you've tried to expunge [and which RickK replaced] are, indeed, valid" that way), but whatever label you feel is appropriate, thanks anyway!

As for "some", I sense we're having a massive case of talking past each other! The clue to the problem is, happily, given by your phrase "African Americans as a collective". See, I almost never think of any group of people as a collective, but rather as a collection of individuals. So for each individual, many (most, I expect) have 'some' non-African ancestry. (Although I suppose it all depends on what one understands by the phrase "X has Y ancestry" - does that meant they are 100% Y, or does it simply mean that there is some - that word again! - Y back there. I read the former, but I can see that others might read the latter.) But I can cheefully live with the wording in the article as you left it - in my note to you I was just trying to explain why I felt "some" was more accurate. The "and"/"or" is a similar situation, one I won't bore you with analyzing. Noel (talk) 19:05, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Understood, but in an article devoted to African Americans, we are, indeed speaking of the group as a collective -- and not of individuals. When you say "or," that means one, but not two, or two, but not three. Yet, there are many African Americans who fit all three categories -- so, the more appropriate word is "and," speaking of the collective. Among African Americans collectively, there are all three heritages represented (no either/or implied -- just a whole characterizing a whole). An exercise in basic logic: "There are red, orange and purple balls in the boxes." Does that mean that every, single box has at least one of each color? One might assume that -- but no, not necessarily. But it does mean that in the boxes, regarded all together, there are balls of all three colors there? Yep. As I said, if one approaches the statement based simply on what it says (not what one might erroneously infer), it is completely correct. Well, enough of that! (I hated logics class.) deeceevoice 19:31, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

P.S. I went back and deleted "Many," because that confuses the issue; the sentence is more correct without it. Perhaps you see my point now? Anyway, I think you're probably as bored with this by now as I am! :-p deeceevoice 19:47, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Re: "Die nigger die"

Wow. No good deed goes unreproved with you, eh? Most people are thankful their user pages are being watched out for; perhaps you should include a warning on yours, so that future overstepping, "highly presumptuous" users know to leave vandalism unreverted. You'll also save time, as you won't ever again have to chide these horrible, vandal-reverting transgressors. If you think I was out of line reverting this and all other edits made by that user, perhaps you should also admonish me for blocking him/her. Honestly, I believe your harangue was neither necessary nor appropriate. -- Hadal 14:02, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Addendum: If you strongly feel the well-intentioned removal of slurs from peoples' user pages warrants rebuke, perhaps you should review Wikipedia:Remove personal attacks (not a policy, but as you can see, it's been discussed at length already). You could propose a policy change to make such removals verboten. -- Hadal 14:40, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Sensitive? Can't be a very effective admin around here if you're sensitive. :) You seem to be mistaking my facetious sarcasm for anger; as for the word "harangue," it was meant in the "disputatious address" sense (perhaps a bit obsolete; my apologies for the confusion). To reiterate: If you feel this strongly (speaking of getting a grip) about others reverting vandalism to your page, I humbly and kindly suggest you include a notice on your user page, so that you'll be saved the trouble of having to call out the "highly presumptuous" actions of other users in future. If you remain active in the community, it's only a matter of time before your user page is vandalised again (just look at the history of my user page.. sigh!). If you are appreciative of vandal reverts (or just their "intent"), as you say, the next time you choose to criticize such reverts it might be best to simply say "Thanks for the revert, but I'd prefer it if you didn't." There's no need to suggest impropriety on the part of the reverter, especially when such actions are widely supported by the community (but again, you could always propose a policy change; I'm sincere by that suggestion). Please keep wikiquette in mind, and as David Gerard has already said, please try to get along with others. Thanks! -- Hadal 18:01, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

A clarification. My complaint was not that you restored the deleted text; I was addressing your deletion of a message left for me by another user. If some simpleton wants to wish me dead and call me everything but a child of God, then let 'em. Thanks for the restoration of deleted text -- but I've got some helpful advice for you w/regard to your (admitted) sarcasm and the "trying to get along with others" bit: "People in glass houses...." One can't act like a supercilious ass and then presume to lecture others on comportment. They have zero credibility. deeceevoice 12:50, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[Note: The below message is meant as an olive branch, so if you choose to read it, please keep that in mind.]

Yes, I was initially sarcastic in response to your complaint, but I did mean it (believe it or not, but perhaps over-the-top) in a bantering way (hence facetious). Tone cannot easily be conveyed through text, and in retrospect it was ill-advised. I apologise for this. I had no hostile intent, just as (it now appears) you did not. From my perspective you were making a rather illogical and (to use your word) supercilious complaint, suggesting that I was out of line for simply watching out for your user page. I thought I was doing you a favour; but for my trouble, I'm told that I am "highly presumptuous". As your refactored user page now says, "If you notice that someone has altered or deleted my language, then I'd appreciate you restoring it." That's all I thought I did; I restored your text. It's a pretty common presumption around here; that is to say, that a user will be thankful when his or her user page is quickly restored following its obliteration. (If I complained every time a thoughtful Wikipedian reverted my user page, I'd probably make a template to save time! [This is a joke.]) I suppose this (along with the suggetion [again, from my persepctive] of impropriety) is what led me to interpret your complaint as discourteous, even if it was not your intention.

I wanted to say that I regret the manner in which we've become familiar. I do see you've been an especially constructive editor and have made countless valuable contributions (especially in areas of black culture/heritage), and I'd rather we not remain on the wrong foot, as it were. The fact that you're attracting vandals means you're doing something right. Please see that this message is not meant to continue the argument, but rather is meant to put an amicable end do it. In any event, I wish you happy editing and a future free of hateful vandalism. -- Hadal 18:55, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Comments on user pages

Hi Deeceevoice,

You are certainly entitled to specify what does and does not go on your personal pages. I didn't see the slur Hadal removed, but it is the culture here to remove obvious vandalism from another's USER page while it is also practice not to edit others' comments on their TALK pages, no matter how bad. Consider it a community style thing, if nothing else.

Usual practice is that noone leave anything on a user's main page, good or bad and, if someone does it inadvertently, they often apologize.

Those who don't mind having people leave stuff on their main user page, like Jimbo Wales almost always say so. -- Cheers, Cecropia | explains it all ® 19:32, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Blackface blanking

Hey, a recent edit of yours blanked blackface. I assume it was an accident, and reverted it back to your previous edit, but I thought I'd bring it to your attention in case you meant to do something else. Tuf-Kat 21:57, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)

Hi

I just wanted to compliment you on a continuing run of good edits and Talk page discussions. Things tend to get more heated than they need to, and you seme to always be able to keep your head. Unlike me. :) Rick K 22:14, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

Walker reference

Just as a matter of interest, what was your "misreading" of the paragraph on Kara Walker in "Negro"? -- Jmabel | Talk 04:47, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

Melanin/superconductivity

What's all this about melanin being a superconductor? I can't find any evidence anywhere that it is one. Can you show me some sources? - furrykef (Talk at me) 06:58, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Adminship

Would you like to be nominated for adminship? I think you would make a good one. Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 21:10, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)

No joke. You are a great contributor, especially to black-related topics, and are also dedicated to combating vandalism. You have the the necessary tenure here and I will nominate you if you would accept the nomination. Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 22:29, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)

use the preview function

deeceevoice, can you revise your editing and finalize it before submission? There's a preview function you know. Otherwise it's difficult to use the history pages since your edits cover the whole freaking page and it's difficult to compare versions. Use the preview function, instead of submitting a new edit for every small grammatical changes and/or sentence shiftings.

I thought I was being helpful! lol I actually DO use the preview function. In explaining multiple edits (especially if something's a real mess) I often run out of room in the space provided. So, if someone wants an explanation of them at a glance, I have to break them up. Further, my edits often cover "the whole freaking page" because they're so numerous. They're not all nitpicky. But I'll keep your (somewhat crudely expressed) request in FREAKIN' mind. deeceevoice 06:59, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Heya

From our chat on African American to here, I wanted to see who I was chatting with. You're from DC; whereabouts? I've lived almost all my life in and around DC, from McLean to 14th St SE to Rockville, and a few other addresses in between. (I'm in North Carolina now) Anyway, as I said in the talk, your arguments make sense, and I've withdrawn my pedantry. :) (I do hope I'm using that word correctly) I'm sure you're tired of people bringing up that argument, but hey, you convinced me. --Golbez 18:03, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, there used to be a page on "home rule" but it was actually completely about statehood, which is not quite the same. Where is the one you're working on?

Also, you might appreciate this anecdote. I hope. But my mother drove up to West Virginia on business, and stopped at a general store for some local flavor, and one of the kids (I think maybe 9 or 10?) saw her DC license plate, and was absolutely shocked that she was white. :) Man, I miss that town sometimes. --Golbez 23:12, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)

Black flight? Wonder if there should be an article on that. When I was going to GWU (class of 2000), I always heard that the base price for an apartment was about $750 a month, and that's in Foggy Bottom, so $1300 in Adams Morgan seems pretty expensive to me. I don't know if I ever went to Adams Morgan or Mt. Pleasant - just never got there. Never been to Georgetown, either. I mostly hung out around Dupont Circle (where my high school was) and Connecticut Ave, and K St west of the White House. And a little bit on Capitol Hill. What it sounds like this will do is move working, previously well-enough-to-do blacks and latinos from places like Adams Morgan, eastwards toward PG County, Northeast and Southeast, since I doubt the western and northern suburbs are cheaper than anything you'll find in DC itself. (Well, maybe a little, depending). So it will be interesting to see the effect that will have on the east side of the city. --Golbez 23:46, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)

Hi just was reading your user pages - just out of interest why do you hate Elvis? PMA 20:47, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

That's cool PMA 22:41, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Music project?

"Oh my lucky stars!! A Negro!!" What's up, man? I didn't think we HAD any other Black Wikipedians around here. I was feeling all lonely and stuff...lol.

I have a project that I'm spearheading to try to improve the quality of R&B and soul music coverage on the Wikipedia. Since wikipedia comes up in almost every search you do for a musician, their information should be correct and informative; however R&B and soul music articles are arguably the most underwritten and/or non existant ones on the site. Would you be interested in joining the project? --b. Touch 16:06, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Black Codes

I noticed that you had edited the article on Black Codes a while back. Since then it has undergone a major expansion that included a change in focus. "Black Codes" went from being:

...laws passed by southern states in the United States during Reconstruction that limited the rights of former slaves.
to, in a characteristic sentence,
Contrary to popular misconception though, the Black Codes did not begin in 1865. Rather they developed over the span of half a century or more and date to the early 19th century in some northern states.

I am not sufficiently familiar with this history to know which version is correct, but the difference is so dramatic that I am concerned that there may be a distortion of meaning. I don't know if this is still an area of interest for you, but if it is then I encourage your review of the article. Cheers, -Willmcw 12:19, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. There's no rush, I'm not actively editing the article - so far just assembling some additional resources and doing some research. The current article is not about the topic you mentioned, but instead is chiefly on laws in the midwest prior to the Civil War. Negrophobia is a related article with a related problem. Anyway, whenever you have time and inclination. Meanwhile I'll keep reading up on the topic. Cheers, -Willmcw 21:15, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

good grief, man...

...I don't think they like black people 'round here. Just got back from Wikipedia:Votes for deletion, where the articles for Lil' Scrappy, Pimp C, and God's Son were all nominated for deletion! Now, I know you aren't into hip-hop, but I hear about these people (and that album) damn near every week--folk nominating things for deletion on a whim. If I were a suspicious type, I'd swear there was an agenda.--b. Touch 18:23, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

NAACP

Can I prevail on you to have a look at Talk:NAACP#This_is_not_the_Place_for_Jewish_Conspiracy_Theories. You've certainly been a voice of reason on enough other related matters. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:58, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)

Support

It is a breath of fresh air to see someone stand up for what they feel is right by "any means necessary". The problem with the internet is that many people suspect that everyone that uses the internet is a white person and therefore thinks that what THEY know about black culture is fine enough. You don't go to an airline mechanic to get a tire changed on your car, ya know? Keep fighting the good fight! Oh, and going back to your comments on the horrible picture in the Afro page, I found a good one, check the page. That guy either had a wig on or a cat asleep on his head :)--Aika 22:15, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)

G.I.T.

On February 15 2005, Deeceevoice asked, while editing The Temptations article: "What does "G.I.T." stand for?"

On February 27 2005, b. Touch replied: "Get It Together". G.I.T. on Broadway = Get it Together on Broadway.

Man, I know WAY too much about Motown. But, hey, it beats having to endure the crap "music" they put out now. --b. Touch 04:43, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Six degrees of Wikipedia

I noted your comments about six degrees of separation on the Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Fuck you and die page. Something like this does already exist at Wikipedia:Six degrees of Wikipedia. You may also be interested in category:Wikipedia games, which is how I discovered the six degress page. Thryduulf 12:20, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Revert

I wont alter your page, but you may want to remove the last paragraph of the 'Wiki whites' section, recently added by another user. At least I hope you do!

some anon is complaining about your userpage

Some anon user is complaining about the comment you made about white people on your user page. The discussion is here: Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance)#Systematic bias — J3ff 02:46, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Afro and dreadlocks

I forgot to tell you: THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU for fixing the pictures (and content) on those articles! --b. Touch 15:19, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Rastafari

The Rastafarianism debate is definitely still open. What do you think? New blood could be very useful in breaking the deadlock. While the argument is dying down there is no consensus to leave the issue for 6 months; that was just one user's request. Basically my wanting to change the name arguments are (a) the name is insulting to Rastafarians,and (b) in the English world as a whole Rastafarianism is not the common usage term. Any insights you have would anyway be most welcome. --SqueakBox 20:13, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

Will let you know about the Rastafarians. I didn't know you had said were in favour, but I do sometimes miss things first time round. I'm in Honduras but was in Guatemala first. I went there because of my passion for Spanish. I really wanted to become fluent, and have. I also wanted to experience living in a third world country, to find out what it was really like. I am doing that too. I was hooked from my first visit to Mexico 5 years ago. I have been with Beverly, who is a black Honduran woman, for the last 13 months, so I am very involved in the place now, which is why I didn't leave after being attacked (that and the dogs). With the computer I am very in touch with the UK, and only miss the countryside from there. If I could earn some money I could see myself living here for ever. I like the heat, too. So, I am not an activist, just a person living here the best I can from the money I have been lucky enough to make in the past. The violence is atrocious here, but it's mostly young men and boys killing each other, so I hope to avoid any trouble in the future. Coming to live in Honduras is the best thing I ever did, --SqueakBox 21:53, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

Melanin

I've put it up for RfM since it doesnt seem to attract any third-party attention in RfC. Ware ware 02:38, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Another melanin bit

Hey Deecee! In regard to a recent reversion you made concerning melanin on the "black Supremacy" page could you comment about it in the talk?[1] Thank's for your time! :o)--Deglr6328 00:05, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Back to Soul Food

Think that Crisco and lard both deserve mention in the article; I have absolutely no reason to doubt your expertise; apparently "my" people (the older ones at least) may have in some instances at least held onto the lard tradition longer than many of "yours". I still recall my mother's amusement at my grandmother's disgust upon learning that my grandfather had once again brought from the store "that ol' compound" instead of "real" hog lard. Seemingly the old folks are (posthumously) getting the last laugh; apparently the "trans fats" of hydrogenated oils are proving to be at least as bad for us as the naturally saturated fats like lard, butter and beef tallow (maybe this explains why my grandparents actually lived to older ages than my parents subsequently did, years of advertising about the superiority of "100% vegetable" to the contrary). Your additions and changes to the article always seem well-reasoned and thoughtful which, needless to say, isn't the case with everyone. Best regards, Rlquall 03:25, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Sweet sorghum sources

I noticed you reverted my edits at Sweet sorghum. I would ask that you cite your sources because according to the National Sweet Sorghum Producers and Processors Association as listed at the talk page, molasses is not made from sweet sorghum. If you have reputable sources that say otherwise, we should list both sides and say the subject is not agreed upon by experts. Liblamb 05:15, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Wareware RfC

Hi, Deeceevoice.

I was just over at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wareware. He sounds like a very troublesome user. I'm not familiar with the RfC process, but I added my comment to the page. I'd be glad to help out in any way. Binadot 16:18, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) Talk

It doesn't really surprise me that no one has taken any action against Wareware. I've encountered users like this before (although none that have targeted me, fortunately), and they tend to single out one person and keep an otherwise low profile. As soon as attention is drawn to them, they usually back off or explode into a cloud of short-lived sock puppets. At any rate, if this RfC business doesn't flush him out into the open, I'd send an email to one of the more influential admins, or just put a note on some talk pages. The vast majority of Wikipedians won't stand for this kind of nonsense. Binadot 17:43, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

From the WP:AN/I posts:

ideological disputes and differences of opinion are no excuse for this kind of conduct

Absolutely agree, 100.0000000%. I hadn't seen that series of comments from WW (that you reproduced in the RFC) when I made that post. He was so far over the line there that the curvature of the earth had removed it from view. Noel (talk) 16:05, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

RfC on Wareware - need to use the template

Deeceevoice, if you want your RfC to proceed, you'll have to format it properly so it can be certified and voted on. You'll find the template here: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Example_user. I urge you to take this template, and copy your evidence to it in the correct places. If you fail to do so, the RfC will not be certified, and you cannot proceed to other forms of dispute resolution. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:39, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

DC, you're welcome. I'm just sorry you had to put up with it. In future, if you find yourself in a situation like that, give me a holler. Even if we can't act against personal attacks, I can at least be there for moral support. In the meantime, I've collected some diffs of the dispute, and have laid them out on your RfC page in an effort to show the pattern of the attacks. See here [2] It's clear that WW started the exchange and that you spent much of your time trying to disengage. Hopefully, the diffs will clarify that. If you feel it makes the page too long, feel free to move the section as you see fit. The diffs will also help if you decide to go to arbitration (and I hope you do), because the arbcom insists that the evidence be laid out in a certain way, with dates, times, and diffs. I hope it helps. Best, SlimVirgin 00:17, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

Don't worry, DC, we'll see this through. Just keep adding the evidence as you have been, we'll (you, but we're willing to help) restructure these to fit with the necessary format when you're ready. You will get to have your say, Ww will get to have his say (if he so chooses), other people will get to comment, and the evidence will speak for itself. El_C 01:03, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Ah, Slim restructured and certified it while I was typing the above. I concur. El_C 01:13, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I couldn't certify it, because it can only be certified by a second editor who tried to resolve the same dispute, and no one did in this case. That could prove to be a problem, but I think we can mount an argument as to why the RfC should go ahead anyway. Just because no one else helped, that shouldn't mean Deeceevoice isn't allowed to make a formal complaint. I did endorse the summary, however. SlimVirgin 01:19, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

Had you informed me of these personal attacks and their heinous nature while I was still involved in the Af. article, DC, I would certify it directly. All I could do now, however, is certify it indirectly. If there is a lesson to be drawn from this, it is that you should'nt have waited so long to issue the complaint. El_C 01:24, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

(edit conflict; wrote this before I saw El C's post)

Actually, I went ahead and refactored the RfC page in line with the template, as Deeceevoice said she had computer issues. I've laid out the diffs I collected in the evidence section. Deeceevoice, you should add or delete diffs as you see fit, but if you add any, preferably in the same or similar format. I'm going to ask Jayjg to take a look at the format to check that I've done it right, and if not, one of us will fix it. These RfCs are supposed to be certified by a second editor who testifies that both editors tried to resolve the same dispute. Without the second signature, the RfC is normally not allowed to proceed. However, I have written in that section: "second signature not available because no editor assisted, probably because no one noticed." I don't know whether that will work, but it's the truth. I have signed in the section after that as the second editor who endorses the summary. Then I've copied in Wareware's defense, though he will probably add to it himself. And the rest of the comments, I copied to the talk page, which is what the template says should be done. Those editors can then decide whether they want their comments to count as evidence, in which case they can post them back in the appropriate place. As for the diffs I picked out as evidence, I included some of the remarks from you. I did this so that people can see the pattern of the exchange, and many of your comments show you trying to disengage. However, it's your evidence so you should edit it as you see fit. Jayjg would be a good person to consult with, as he is very knowledgeable about the presentation of evidence. I hope this is of some help to you. Best, SlimVirgin 01:19, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

The other thing I meant to say: if you want your summary (where you initally offered examples) to precede the evidence with the diffs, by all means reinsert it. It's your evidence section, so you should add and subtract as you see fit. Also, regarding keeping material here, you can create a user subpage if you want, then it won't be so public. Go to the search box, type in (for example) User:Deeceevoice/evidence; a notice will come up saying that page doesn't exist but showing you an empty page — simply type something into the empty space, press save, and it's done. Note that recent server glitches have meant that newly created pages don't always show up instantly, so if you get a message after saving that (again) says the page doesn't exist, just wait a few minutes and check (e.g. go to your user-contribututions list and see whether it turns up there). Hey, and you're more than welcome regarding the help. ;-) SlimVirgin 01:58, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

Outside view

I constructed an outside view narrative, based on the evidence I witnessed. It is located here. Let me know what you think. El_C 05:17, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I asked and I have been answered. I have removed the outside view since it was so very obviously divorced from reality, and not nearly critical enough, and so crudely and paternalistically mischaracterized you, and the many other things you have just convinced me of. I will no longer contribute to that RFC, shamefuly so. If only I could have seen it articulated in that way beforehand, but that's hindsight/foresight/insight/out of sight out of.

I did not agree with every point that you made in your thorough explanation, still, it definitely removed the veil from my eyes, please accept my apologies for all my oversights and shortcomings.

I'm going to stick to editing the lead paragraphs for African countries (my current low-stress project), away from conflict (or attention per se., for that matter) and where I can't let my intuition fail me as it so often does. I owed you better researched opinion for what I said and in proportion to what Ww said to you, I see all that now, very clearly. If there is a shred for my dignity, then, it would be for you to believe me that the product for all this was being distracted by many things, not convictions. Shamefuly yours, El_C

P.S. I note (I forgot) with a measure of irony and dispelasure that my first comment to Ww was also an apology, an apology over a content dispute in which he demonstrated to me that your edits were in error (I initially thought he was being rather unfair, but were persuaded otherwise, now I can much better qualify what actually took place – of course you would'nt know or remember any of this, but while I have not left an impression on you, the same cannot be said otherwise). Hah! I'll end this before it turns into one of my infamous asides, but conclude in saying that I am not an apologist! I just make a lot of mistakes, and apologize for some, occasionally. If I can have that, I may yet retain a shred of what's left of my aforementioned dignity. El_C 07:12, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Breaking my promise

In light of the newly compiled evidence, which I only had a chance to read closely, reflect on, recollect from, and review today, I now feel I am in the position to certify the RFC. El_C 12:32, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

diff

In answer to your question: diff is a Unix utility that outputs the difference between two text files. Sincerely yours, El_C 16:29, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Could you help with this?

Hi again.

I came across Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Afrophobia. The nomination was made by GRider, who is known for vandalizing VfD by nominating large numbers of arbitrary pages for deletion. In its current state, the afrophobia article is fairly useless, but I know it can be vastly expanded. I don't have the background for it, but perhaps you do. You seem to be very well-versed in African-American topics. You might also want to comment on the VfD page. They all seem to think the topic is non-notable or crufty. Binadot 17:38, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on the VfD page. I just wanted to tell you I've rewritten the page extensively and elaborated to the best of my ability. It's still pretty patchy, but I think it's healthy enough to survive VfD now. Binadot 21:23, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Wetware RFC rework

Hi, I see the RfC has been substantially reworked. I don't think this version is anything like as effective, or as strong, as the earlier version, the one that focussed on WW's abusive and repugnant language to you.

Also, about the lack of people calling WW to account previously; I can't speak for others, but perhaps I will serve as a useful data point. The Wiki's a big place. On the one page where I had observed you interacting with WW (Talk:Afrocentrism), I would have characterized the interaction as deeply opposed, and somewhat hostile, but not way over the line on his part. I don't know which page the thread you quoted those repulsive comments of theirs came from, but it's one I have never seen. This of course doesn't explain why other people who did read that page didn't previously say anything to WW, of course. My perception is that once you did bring WW's comments to wider attention (through the RFC, and your posting on WP:AN/I) most people were pretty quick to condemn WW's remarks.

Anyway, it's your call what to put in the RFC, of course, but I thought I'd let you know that I felt a focus on the simple language issue was a lot more effective. You would, I expect, like to make the focus broader, but I think that's not optimal, for two reasons. For one, the broader you make it, the more you will extend it into areas where people don't agree with you. Second, if it contains a number of points, you'll just muddy the water, and the debate will be about the points where people disagree (instead of focussing on WW's completely unacceptable language). Your call, though. Noel (talk) 19:16, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Pharlap's origins: examined

I don't think Pharlap will be back. As you may have long-suspected, I think he is a Ww sockpuppet (thus will incur any penalty that Ww does). Incidentally, if Ww is who he says he is, and he returns to harass you under a new account, we can use his previous ip and contact UCLA who I'm sure would take action against a student who using their network in such a way. Comparing between the ips of Ww and Ph, therefore, may prove revealing. El_C 16:50, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Deeceevoice, as a matter of interest, can you point me to the English gaff(s) that you felt Pharlap and WW had in common? SlimVirgin^(talk) 20:37, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)

Golliwog/Golliwogg matter

I don't know much about the Golliwogg/golliwog, although I agree with your assessment. My only involvement with the article was the edit I made earlier today, when I borrowed [[Image:Gollywogsmall.jpg]] for my rewrite of the Afrophobia article. On a whim, I decided to alter the image, which struck me as unattractively formatted.

Shall I simply move the existing article to Golliwogg and create a redirect? Or should I create a separate article about the generic golliwog caricature/doll? Binadot 05:22, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

- I just read your latest message and I agree. The page should simply be moved to Golliwogg. Binadot 05:57, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  - Okay, it's been moved. Binadot 06:07, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I would assume that Upton's images are in the public domain, but I don't know how to verify it. In any case, I agree that the current Golliwog image is unsuitable. The images at [3] are more effective, but we would probably need to crop out the extraneous details. I guess I'll leave that at your discretion.

On a related mater, I wonder if we should replace the image on Afrophobia with something a little more serious. After all, Afrophobia is about "irrational fear or hostility". The Golliwog is a symbol more of patronizing ridicule than outright fear or hatred. It should probably be relocated to a less prominent position, maybe under the "Afrophobia in the United States" section. The first image should be something in a more sinister vein--perhaps something related to Apartheid or lynching. Right now, I'm more concerned about getting the votes to keep the page. TheCustomOfLife (MikeH) switched his vote, but no one else has, and there's still some question as to whether it's a neologism. Binadot 05:57, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Afrophobia

Hi. I thought I'd start a new section as this might be a long-running thing. Thanks for adding the talk page, which lists a lot of things I had been privately brainstorming (especially the stuff about black self-loathing, Arab racism, etc). It is obviously a massive subject, and just as noteworthy as, say, Anti-Semitism.

The big concern over at Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Afrophobia is that the term is a neologism, which, in the case of a page like Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Riggensob, is a justifiable basis for deletion. However, I feel that if a concept is notable, it should be listed under the most appropriate term, whether or not the term is itself notable. The word "Afrophobia" is not particularly well-known, but the concept it describes is easily as important and noteworthy as, say, Anti-Hellenism, if not more so. The neologism rule should only be invoked if (A) the concept is non-notable, or (B) the concept being described by the neologism is better known by a more common term. In this case, I think the delete voters are being unreasonable, or (more likely) they simply haven't seen the rewrite. Before that, it was little more than a tautological dicdef, which would naturally invite suspicion that the term is a neologism, and that the concept is shallow or involves original research.

I intend to place messages on the talk pages of some of the voters, just to let them know that the page has been rewritten. Binadot 07:28, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I voted. Keep, of course. I see no reason to delete it. --FuriousFreddy 23:09, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help with the afrophobia article. The VfD virus has spread to articles on colorphobia, negrophobia and probably pigmentocracy as well. Do what you can to help if you can. Am kind of dimmed on the whole wikipedia thing right about now. Thought that this was a real contribution...apparently non-conventional truths are not viable to some. ----Nazikiwe 00:54, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The "viable truth" is what afrophobia is about, plain and simple. Anything else is a distortion of the facts and therefore has no place on wikipedia. Under the circumstances the best thing that is possible is to hold high my pride, dignity, nobility, and self-respect as a shield of righteous power. The VfD comment is in reference to the "tail" in the talk section of articles that relating to afrophobia. This is a revealing experience to say the least. In the "new" millenium "things are more like they are now than they have ever been".

Re: Blatant racism

(This is User:B Touch; I changed my name to protect the innocent...or something like that). That's beyond horrible. No one should have to tolerate such behavior; it's entirely uncalled for. --FuriousFreddy 17:09, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

LOL. I'm only furious on Mondays. Heh heh. --FuriousFreddy 19:48, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Johnnie Cochran

My head hurts now. Somebody deleted my addition that Cochran was African-American. I just put it back. What is WITH these people? And I wish they WOULD come at me with some "I'll add a picture" (instead of explicitly stating that he's black) like they did TWICE before. What type of mess is that? And since it doesn't work for all black folk (Bumper Robinson and Michael Ealy immediately come to mind), it's a less-than-valid "solution". --FuriousFreddy 20:37, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Now I know why black folks are scarce 'round here...lol. --FuriousFreddy 22:53, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Coppell High School

Congratulations on the excellent contributions you made to the Afrophobia article. If you have a moment to spare, would you mind reviewing the article in progress for Coppell High School? Your comments and suggestions are quite welcome. --GRider\^talk 23:26, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Wareware Request for Arbitration

So, ~~I think it's safe to say that the discussion has now been concluded, and~~ I believe you finished the evidence bit some time ago. Whenever you're ready we can file for arbitration against Ww. Let me know if you wish for me to initiate the processs. Otherwise, I will leave the timing and filing at your discretion. Yours, El_C 03:39, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm preoccupied with many things at the moment (unrelated to WP), I would have answered you sooner. But, I'm ready. Essentially, the page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration follows the following format:

Involved parties: indicating both of you

Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request: link to a message on Wareware's talk page where you inform him of the RFAr [I can make that comment on his page if you like]

Statement by party 1 [You]: Here you make a statement and link the RFC for the pertienent evidence and discussion.

Statement by party 2 [Him]:

(And there can be a commentary, too, where others can speak)

[Finally,]] Arbitrators' opinions on hearing this matter (0/0/0/0)

So, let me know when you got your statement all ready and I'll inform Wareware of it. Or, conversely, leave an I filed an RFAr against you comment to him yourself and start without me. Totally up to you — the tehcnical point is that he needs to be informed of the RFAr before it is actually filed. If you have any questions, I'll be pleased to answer them. This will all be over soon, Deecee. El_C 06:45, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Good! I knew you were going to leave him that notice yourself, but I thought I'd offer to do so on your behalf nontheless. :) El_C 07:37, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hah, this is like ping-pong! You're very welcome — it's the least I can do. And do let me know if there is anything at all I can help you with. I can offer my services as tech support, too. ;) I am looking forward to reading your statement! All the best, El_C 07:50, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yellow banners, Kara Walker, and other matters

Theory is, once you click on the yellow "new messages" banner, it goes away. Practice is, caching and the use of multiple database servers often messes that up.

Kara Walker is a brilliant artist, but a politically complicated person. She likes to make people squirm. Yes, I agree that reclaiming "Negro" (and, even more so, "Negress") is an odd project. But probably a lot of people felt the same way about the efforts 25 years ago to reclaim "queer", and now we have departments of Queer Theory. (Walker is not the only African American woman to at least toy with these words in recent decades: Jill Nelson wrote a memoir called My Authentic Negro Experience, although her irony was not as multi-edged as Walker's.) Walker's work has been shown surprisingly much here in Seattle: the Henry Art Gallery, a museum attached to the University of Washington, did a pretty major show of her work a couple of years back, and she is represented here by Greg Kucera, who has done a couple of gallery shows.

I've been trying to archive the discussion on Talk:African American. What an encyclopedic display of white ignorance. I see that a lot of people have been chewing you out for what they see as your strident tone, but, frankly, I'm amazed at your forbearance. At first I thought I'd be able to categorize the discussions, but 60% of it is the same thing over and over: people who don't understand the difference between etymology and definition. And half the rest is just outright bigotry. Amazing. -- Jmabel | Talk 08:45, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

Jacob Lawrence's work is ubiquitous here in Seattle, since he lived the last 30 years or so of his life here. I've lost count of the retrospectives, and while I don't know just how many of his pieces Microsoft has in their corporate collection, I've seen at least half a dozen scattered around their walls. I'm afraid I'm not in the economic league to own any of his work. A friend of mine, an artist named Eddie Walker, was a sometime drinking buddy of his (earning much disapproval from Gwendolyn Knight, who was not the first person to consider Eddie a bad influence on a spouse, although usually it's the husband complaining).

As for my perspective on this: I'm a secular person of Jewish ethnicity; believe me, the mess on Talk:Jew and other related pages is just as bad, the only difference being that we get it from both ends: besides the ignorant outsiders, we have a larger collection of ignorant insiders participating. Obviously, I can look at Talk:African American with a little more detachment, as I'm sure you could look at Talk:Jew with more detachment.

I don't know if you ever took a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic Groups, which I tried starting about a year ago, and which had some positive effects, but which never really took off. I've thought about trying to revive it some time: I think it helps to have a place to discuss what is appropriate in articles like this without having to bring the matter down to one particular group. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:48, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

For the record: a silly dispute w/JCarriker inappropriately taken elsewhere

I notice this exchange has been archived (hidden) by JCarricker, and I want it here --in case it resurfaces: deeceevoice 12:43, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Another county heard from

I'm making a remark here only because JCarriker wrote me an email and asked me if I could please step in and see if I could help defuse the conflict between the two of you. I don't want to get involved in the Afrophobia thing at all, but I do want to remark on what he said on the RfC.

He endorsed your summary of the situation.
He pointed out that he is not a person who has had an easy time working with you.
He chastised the community for letting this go on so long, and called for strong consideration of a hard ban on Wareware.

As I read it, his mention that you and he have been in conflict only strengthens the significance of his endorsement of your statement and his strong condemnation of Wareware. In effect, he's making it clear that someone doesn't have to be particularly on the best terms with you to think you are totally in the right vis a vis Wareware. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:06, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)

You asked "But what do you mean you don't want to get involved in the Afrophobia thing?" What I mean is, as far as I know I haven't even read most of the exchange in question (not even sure what pages it may be on), and don't particularly plan to. In my experience, you and JCarriker have both been excellent contributors to Wikipedia. I don't know what went between you, and I don't really want to: I like working with you both.

As I said, JCarriker wrote me an email and asked me if I could help defuse the conflict between the two of you. In particular I gather that you were concerned that what he wrote on the Wareware RfC would come off as detrimental to you: as I said, I believe that if the matter comes before the ArbCom, his remark there will only bolster the case against Wareware.

I wrote you because someone I have worked with in a positive way asked me to step in and address another person I have worked with in a positive way. Period. It may be that mediation is in order, but I personally am not going to try further to play mediator here, partly because I'm about to launch into a very fulltime project outside of Wikipedia, and I want my time here to be spent editing articles. I believe that both of you, unlike Wareware, have plenty to contribute. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:10, Apr 3, 2005 (UTC)

Sly & the Family Stone

This article on the most influential black band of the late 1960s is up at Featured article candidates. What do you think? --FuriousFreddy 16:05, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

(1) You're from the Bay Area? Cool. I'm from the direct opposite side of the country: Augusta, GA. (2) I'll look over the run-on sentences and do a copyedit. (3) "Forcibly" is what I meant. And yes, Larry Graham was forcibly removed form the band. Sly's clique jumped Larry's clique at the hotel after a show in 1972; Larry and his wife had to climb out the hotel window, and, ducking down in the back seat of Pat Rizzo's car, were safely escorted out of the area. Larry refused to ever confront Sly face-to-face, and negotiated his way out of the band. Should I add all of that to the article? I thought it was a bit "tabloidish"; that's why I left it out. (4) Re, The Supremes, that photo is from the Jean Terrell-era, when they purposefully pushed for a blacker image after Diana Ross (whose style always has catered to white people more than black, which adversly affected the Supremes' credibility in their own backyard) left to go solo. --FuriousFreddy 21:27, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Cool work on the picture. I'm one of those people who's always going "The Supremes were more than just's Diana ROss' career catapult!" And I added the Sly stuff to the article. Wow; I feel all young'n'stuff; I was born in 1982. --FuriousFreddy 15:09, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I have revised my Wareware comments

I have revised my comments, at Wareware. I'm not sure if it's what your looking for but it's how I feel and maybe might give you insight into what I meant in my original post. There is no point in us fighting deecee we share the same interests and are going to meet again-- we should be working together not against each other. I never intended any malice towards you in anything that I have done and I am sorry for the role I played in our misunderstanding. If you have a further suggestion about my elaboration please feel free to express it on my talk page. P.S. you can find our original discussion in archive IV, I don't delete things just move them. :) Peace. -JCarriker 01:29, Apr 3, 2005 (UTC)

Nice user page

It strikes me as rather afrocentric but that’s not so bad, at least you express yourself. My prism doesn't happen to be my ethnicity, I see all things thru the eye of one who loves God first, and strives to love my neighbors as myself (neighbors including blackfolks, and everybody else too ;). See here and here for more info if you like. My only concern about your page is what would happen if someone had a page like yours expressing their euro or anglocentrism, would that be ok? If so, no worries, but I suspect things might not go well for them. (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 10:21, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I replied at my User talk. Cheers, (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 10:54, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

And again, cheers, (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 11:10, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Vaoverland

I am flattered by your compliments. I will add Black Supremacy to my watch list. I do not have strong feelings about NOI or the inclusion of the beltway sniper item. I am puzzled by your comment about the wording, although I did not write much of it. I tossed the matter out on the Talk page to see what other writers have to say. Do you have an opinion about the RK/Fireboy edit war? I could only check the sources, since I profess no deep understanding of NOI.

One last thing, if you like the Talk Box, I can easily make one for you (no charge) <gr> and put it at the top of your talk page for you. It has helped me a lot. Yours in Richmond, Mark. Vaoverland 20:32, Apr 3, 2005 (UTC)

Add topic