Jmac800

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. , SqueakBox 20:00, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Black Romans

You'll be taken much more seriously if you don't edit other people's remarks and if you provide credible sources for your claims, such as printed books by professional historians (no amateur's websites please). At present, your behavior is nearly indistinguishable from the vandals that try to mess up WP every day. Stan 20:48, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Jmac800 a vandal

Jmac800 is a vandal. See for example: [1]. --Panairjdde 09:40, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

---

He's even vandalizing discussion pages. Virgil61 19:16 21, October 2005 (UTC)

• 

  Regarding the article Socrates. This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- (drini's page|☎) 01:40, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

---

Thats simply silly there is more than enough evidence that proves socrates was black. His black ancestry should at least be mentioned as a possibility.

Racism

Dude, all these people are not black, please do not edit their pages and assert that they were black based on facial characteristics. Did you know this is how Nazi Germany determined the "Jewishness" of its citizens? FranksValli 04:54, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

---

Yes all these people are black. Socrates is clearly a black man and it doesn't take a magnifying glass to see it. Also most athenians were black at his time so it only made sense that he was black

This is the comment you left on my talk page:

"Dude stop assuming that all these people are white based of facial characteristics that is plain racsim. Just because many people in Greece today are white hod do you know that was the case 2000+ years ago"

My reply:

This is your own method of determining race, which I'm criticizing. If you agree it is racism then stop editing articles using this criteria. FranksValli 18:42, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

---

So then why do we accept this for whites but not for blacks

There is no positive evidence that any of these guys were black. To say it is possible they were black is to ignore TOTAL lack of evidence and say that because it is possible, it is therefore probable. This is horrible logic. It is possible that Pegasus exists, but it doesn't follow that it is probable Pegasus exists. Wikipedia policy states that there is to be no original research in articles. This means that you must back up your claims with links to professional studies, especially in this case.

In other words, this isn't the place to argue these issues or to provide circumstancial evidence based on facial characteristics, which is about as unscientific as you can get.

FranksValli 22:46, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

---

There is no evidence they were white. Beethoven teacher wrote a book saying that he was a blackamoor

You still fail to provide references. Book title?--Panairjdde 07:43, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Signing comments

Hi there. Whenever you leave your comments in talk pages, can you please add your signature at the end of each of your comments by typing four tildes like this; ~~~~. Regards, --Gramaic | Talk 01:23, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

November 2005

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --Yamla 15:48, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Gay controversy

I notice while asking for proof about alleged homophobia in Rastas and certzain singers, that you also delete the proof that has been offered at buju Banton, who is indeed facing crimiunal charges relating to gay bashing, charges that you deleted. Huh? SqueakBox 01:26, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Please read my comment on the talk page. We need nmo evidence that he is truly a gay basher. Are you really suggesting sub judice events should not be reported. See Trials of Saddam Hussein. Your blanking in this way could be considered vandalism so please stop, SqueakBox 01:46, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Please desist. We are not detectives. The fact that it is in the papers, including Jamaican paers, is enough, SqueakBox 01:59, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

No one is saying don't edit. but I am saying don't just blank. That is not the way to write an encyclopedia. And if you attract the pro gays they will revert every one of your edits, SqueakBox 02:00, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Do take a look at Sizzla and Talk:Sizzla now. The way forward is not to delete the anti gay material but to find material critical of Outrage's approach, shoddy translations, etc. Having read that Outrage translates Sizzla's fire fi di man dem weh go ride man behind as burn the men who have sex with men I think it is a pure mistranslation, as what I see the lyrics are saying is Jah go burn the gay men etc. Perhaps the best place to start any crusade is the Outrage! article where I have writen a little piece on the Rastas. IMO, partly based on their dodgy translations, Outrage! are persecuting the Rasta faith, but that would be original research unless I could source such a claim. So there are some real issues here, rich white culture criticing poor, black culture etc, but just deleting the material that offended you is not the way forward. Someone else reverted all your edits along this line this morning, as I indeed knew that someone would, having been here more than a year now, SqueakBox 20:13, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Blanking own talk page

I notice you have blanked this page and the multiple vandalism accusations against you, before making an unjustified vandalism accusation on my talk page. I've reported the blanking at Wikipedia:Vandalism_in_progress.--JWB 08:09, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

vandalism again

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. dab (ᛏ) 21:54, 14 December 2005 (UTC)