User talk:Gilgamesh

Welcome to Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core! We know you will contribute greatly. Please read the editors' guidelines. Have fun! Crew (talk) 14:27, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for all your work. --Idris (talk) 13:39, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

You should be able to import pages soon. Special pages, down the bottom. -- Crew (talk) 03:49, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

I look forward to it. I'll try to avoid the Dark Side and use my new powers only for good. Gilgamesh (talk) 03:52, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Froglich's changes

Yeah, I saw his changes, and tended to agree with many of them. Let me have a more detailed look over the next day or so before taking action. I do watch for cases where large deletions occur. I did agree with some of his redirects. Also, fill me in more on your concerns here. Finally, I don't think you were overstepping. -- Crew (talk) 20:57, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

I have looked at the issue in more detail and have stated what I plan to do in my talk page under your entry. -- Crew (talk) 02:27, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

The first thing that caught my attention was in race-baiting. Froglich added the following sentence: "Race-baiting is a disingenuous argumentative tactic in Marxist class warfare identity politics." While I may agree with the sentiment, this sentence is drooling with venom and throws any pretext of objectivity out the window.

Second, I saw the list of articles axed into redirects with the edit summary "Every murderous communist nitwit who ever lived does not merit their own fawning wiki page." These pages now point to the Clinton clemency page which initially struck me as unsatisfactory as it lists their charges and sentences without really touching on the underlying crimes. On closer examination, it appears the old articles were no more illuminating in this regard, so I guess maybe this is not really an issue after all.

Finally, I noticed the large insertion into George Bernard Shaw‎. The new section has a factual, encyclopedic tone that is sorely lacking in the race-baiting insertion referenced above. I've checked a couple of the citations, and they appear to legitimately say what the article claims they say. Due to the length of the insertion and the number of citations contained within it, I strongly suspect this was copied verbatim from somewhere else. As long as the source is licensed under creative commons, this should not be an issue for us. --Gilgamesh (talk) 06:29, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

1) Socialist class-warfare rhetorical tactics have been going on since before any of our grandfathers were alive (in fact, they've been going on since before Marx (b. 1818) was alive, with "the Cold War" properly beginning with the French Revolution and continuing to the present day). The "pretext" of the race-baiting statement is that its assertion is true. ("Objectivity", all too often these days, is morphed into a subtle code meaning "please be accommodating of other interpretations, even if you know they're wrong". I.e., a far cry from, say, the Objectivism of Ayn Rand, which methodically excises false premises. Most of us unconsciously use English terms that have held additional bastardized definitions for decades, even over a century, such as is the case with "anarchy", which the socialists hijacked for their own use in the mid-19th century, and which has now come to mean the exact opposite of its original ancient Greek meaning.)

2) The cut-n-paste was from a section (my original input) in the Shaw article at Wikipedia that I'd sandboxed on my Wikipedia user page when it had became clear to me that Shaw's groupies were firmly in control of the article and were going to soft-peddle all of his Third Reich boosterism and Fabian eugenicist genocidal fantization by continually deleting the section. The text of Beatrice Potter's correspondence letters with Shaw is public domain, even if a particular source documenting their existence is not.

Anyway, it looked kinda sleepy around here, so I just dived in.--Froglich (talk) 08:15, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Akulkis's Changes

The modern English word Jew comes from the Old French giu. This latter term ultimately comes from the first century Greek term Ioudaios (Ἰουδαῖος), which can be either an ethnonym or a term for an inhabitant of the Roman province of Judea. The use of derivatives from the name of the ancient Kingdom of Judah as ethnonyms can be attested at least as far back as the 4th century BC. For that reason, I believe it would be incorrect to say that people living 300 BC and afterward were not Jewish. Furthermore, prior to self-identifying as Jews, they referred to themselves as Israelites, not Hebrews. Gilgamesh (talk) 22:54, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

I don't care what they "identified themselves as". It's an article about a RELIGIOUS book, and the RELIGION practiced by those peaple that time (Contemporaneous with Genesis) was what eventually was called the HEBREW religion. That's the religion specified throughout all of the books in the Bible written up until the end of the Old Testament. Not only did they not call themselves Jewish, NOBODY ELSE did, either, as the term had not even been devised yet. You are attempting to deliberately confused the difference between Judaism (which is to say Babylonian Talmudism) and which refers to JUDEA (not all of Isreal, as 10 of the 12 tribes had already been permanently scattered), and people who had never even known the name Israel (the person who the land of Israel was named after). Want to know WHY there is so much problems in the mideast? Because a bunch of Turks from the Central Asian steppes are pretending to be descendants of the people who fled Egypt and wandered in the desert eating Manna every morning for 40 years. DON'T CONTRIBUTE TO THE PROBLEM by buying into, and promoting that lie. The overwhelming majority of Jews have absolutely ZERO connection to the modern day state which calls itself Isreal, but in all truth, is modern day Ashkenazia, and which, back in the 1950's, DELIBERATELY delivered brain-damaging levels of X-ray radiation to Sephardic children, i.e. who were truly were descendants of the Judeans. By your logic, Socrates and Plato were both subatomic physicists. Dirk Gently (talk) 12:22, 23 April 2018 (UTC)