This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Forgive me if it is inappropriate to come to you directly with this: the initial act of vandalism on this page was to move it from "Church Fathers," presumably based on the religious motivations of the other recent vandalism. Could you please move it back? I would do it myself, but I am not yet auto-confirmed. Thank you. anthologetes ^{( talk • contribs)} 05:01, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Edit: see here anthologetes ^{( talk • contribs)} 05:02, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Solved. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 06:04, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

I offended a vandal on the page of CSM Bucharest, look: did you see what he do? Regarding O-Zone, they are relocated to Bucharest, all the Moldovans who were promoted by Romania have citizenships. This is hilarous! I got along with the Hungarian users very well, I never disagreed on objective opinions. Christina ( talk) 12:05, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

@ Cristina neagu: I don't know much about sports. Anyway, I think that you should refrain from stirring trouble and avoid edits which could be seen as WP:PROMO. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 12:09, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes, yes, my main area is not Eastern Europe but handball (women's handball more). East European clubs are stronger now there. I didn't disagree with the Danish user when he removed promo. But it was as promo as writing on Cristiano Ronaldo, Barcelona, Real Madrid and others were. CSM Bucharest and Gyor are the best clubs in Champions League, I explained very well to Clotilde but she disagreed. And I didn't insist anymore. Christina ( talk) 12:12, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Da, imi pare rau ca am jignit acolo. Pe Wikipedia trebuie sa fim oameni totusi. A vandalizat mai multe pagini si face ca nici nu poti sa ii dai revert. Nu doar ca schimba echipele ca si cum ar arata in sezonul urmator, dar si adauga jucatori din burta. Si atunci m-am enervat. Christina ( talk) 12:30, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

@Tgeorgescu. I respected your decision as Jesus respected the decision of the honorable Jewish Elders and the powerful Roman leader to crucify Him. After all, you are honest in serving those who give you the privilege to judge what could be said, or not, about the Gospel, mainly about Jesus sayings (though before hearing anything from me about them on the "Gospel" talk page). So your reaction may simply be a clear sign from Heaven to tell me that Wikipedia, you serve, is about anything but exploring the solid truths revealed by Jesus; a taboo even on the “Gospel” page. Anyway, I wish you the best while I appreciate your honesty. KerimF ( talk) 16:47, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

@ KerimF: We only render the views of WP:RS, not random musings about the gospels, see WP:NOTFORUM. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 01:55, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Do you consider retracting the reclamation as a good Romanian and a gesture of good will? I really don't have bad intentions on Wikipedia as you see. I would have preferred for instance to talk on email about what's bothering you (to be more specified), Mr Georgescu! Because you are also Romanian like me or I am Romanian like you. I could have explained my point of view and even accept anything maybe. And of course, to respect the rules. Every of your reports are bad on my CV, I am sure your past is also not 100% according to the rules. Christina ( talk) 17:01, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

@ Cristina neagu: Well, I have nothing personal against you. Abide by the WP:RULES, don't perform WP:TE and I won't complain about you. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 17:04, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

You would make a great gesture of humanity if you would retract your reclamation. Do you still want to retract the complaint? Just be a man! You can still help me if you want to do it. I am getting condemned harshly. Christina ( talk) 19:49, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@ Cristina neagu: I think that you have been offered a chance to go with only a formal warning, but you have forfeited such chance. You do a pretty good job at... condemning yourself. Also, please mind that TBANs and blocks are not being punitive (i.e. penalties), these are only applied in order to prevent further harm to the encyclopedia. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 19:57, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@ Cristina neagu: Look, please consider retracting it, if you have any heart. For me it's important to edit what I want. My user focuses on handball. This would also be an injustice to you or to any normal user on Wikipedia. I am a contributor, this is Marxism. Please turn right! Otherwise you didn't want to retract it, just to provoke me. Christina ( talk) 20:00, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@ Cristina neagu: You first denounce me of alleged harassment and some minutes later you ask me to have heart for you? You come along across as totally immature. Either wait till you reach the age of 21, else see WP:NOTTHERAPY. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 20:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Because you created this mess. You came out from nowhere, we didn't even edit one single page at the same moment in years. First you gave me talk page warning like you are some administrator, which you obviously aren't. Secondly you make complaint against me. Exactly like in school, I swear. But you didn't find the right man or woman in my case, I am simply a too good person, really patriotic but not crazy nationalist. Find out you did against Romania, and I really had some quality edits in every domain. So you are really treating me like an enemy from nowhere. This is very strange. I don't know, do you want to provoke women? Because I could do the same against you, but I am not that childiss and I really have a good heart. Christina ( talk) 20:19, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@ Tgeorgescu: Vedeti ca nu am nicio legatura cu IP-ul din Brasov cu care aveti conflict pe Wikipedia romaneasca. Eu sunt din Cluj. Am vazut ca ati scris ca va hartuieste si ceva despre Wikipedia in engleza. Aceasta ca sa stiti ca nu am legaturi suspecte. Personal cred ca aveti probleme poate cu acesti useri, care se impun la articolele dumneavoastra, nu cu unul nevinovat ca si mine. V-ati razbunat pe cine nu trebuie dar poate ca doriti sa va delectati cu discutiile de la reclamatii. Sunteti foarte reclamant pentru un intelectual destul de mare. Christina ( talk) 20:56, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Si prima data cand m-ati tras de urechi pe Wikipedia, partea cu holocaustul chiar o consider importanta si nu am dorit sa sterg sau sa denaturez. Cunosc si importanta holocaustului pe Wikipedia. Singurele chestii ce nu mi-au placut au fost cele de batjocura, dar nu referitor la aceasta parte. Partea cu holocaustul se repeta, eu citisem deja tot articolul, si postase in partea cu religia. Am lasat ca erau atatia evrei chiar in 1930, dar ce sa mai caute iar partea cu holocaustul la religie? Si dupa aia am mai adaugat si cati evrei sunt in ziua de azi in Romania. Ati tras probabil inca de la inceput concluzii gresite. Christina ( talk) 21:14 16 February 2019 (UTC)

About being an admin: there was never a vote about me becoming admin, since I have never submitted my candidacy for adminship.

About users who have retired because of me:

• Michael2012ro who claimed that several of my references were written by Antichristic Bible scholars (like David Strauss and presumably at least one of Michael Coogan and Bart Ehrman), see [1] and [2];
• Mihaibarboi who accused me, among other editors, of writing historically (and "materialistically" — I'm not completely sure but I think he conflated the academic approach with materialism) about Christianity, see [3];
• Valimali67 aka JOrb who accused me and several other editors of violating the Constitution of Romania for writing "Isus" instead of "Iisus", see [4];
• Vladimir-Adrian who edit-warred for including pure evangelism preaching inside Wikipedia articles, see [5];
• Masahiro who pushed an extreme-right hate campaign against homosexuals through editing Wikipedia;
• some Bible thumpers who dislike WP:ABIAS and WP:RNPOV, e.g. MFF2013;
• some Nazis, Iron Guard adepts and other apologists of war criminals, e.g. Wamkihok indeffed for threatening with legal action in order to whitewash the article ro:Nichifor Crainic.

No thanks, we do not need users like this, whose purpose is sheer WP:ADVOCACY.

About Asybaris01: for the most part I have simply ignored him. It was the other way around: he would have liked to see me go away from Wikipedia, together with all mentions of Michael Coogan, which he regarded as threat to the national identity. He regularly displayed childish tantrums against editors whom he disliked. Generally speaking, he disliked the fact that Wikipedia is WP:MAINSTREAM, WP:NPOV and multi-ethnic (global and diverse). He disliked the idea that Wikipedia treats Christianity as a religion like any other religion, having no special privileges.

And no, no one punishes you for one single mistake. You would get a TBAN only for persisting in mistakes.

As a biologist it is very clear to me that our "base" morality comes from our biology. We are social mammals. Social mammals feel empathy for each other, and help each other out (reciprocity). They also enjoy the company of others, feel bad if they do things that harm others, will shun individuals that break social rules and all the other things that make them (and us) behave the way we do.

— James Johnson, Quora.com

This is the explanation for my AE request. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 21:41, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes, you are poisoned by some non-biblical ideologies but your hatred is gonna bring you down. Please retract your reclamation, if you have any heart. Otherwise I am not gonna ask you again anymore. Just because I need time for Wikipedia adaptation doesn't mean I deserve such a thing. Yes, I will probably also leave because of you. You put people down without any remorse, "Christian"! Christina ( talk) 10:50, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@ Cristina neagu: It could come as a total surprise, but I don't hate you. I just don't think that you have the necessary maturity to edit Wikipedia. In general, I don't hate anyone and I welcome back any editor which sincerely addresses his/her own editing problems. As a general advice: grow up and learn to play by the WP:RULES. Perhaps you are underage: wait till you become 21 years old and then come back to edit Wikipedia. If you are above 21, I think it's hopeless. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 15:13, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Please clarify to me how I broke the editing rules for the Nebuchadnezzar II page. I explained my reasons for the edit, and you did not refute them, but instead just labeled my editing as "disruptive." Please explain. Thanks. Luke6802 ( talk) 22:54, 23 February 2019 (UTC)Luke6802

Any indoctrination is wrong and feeding the information you want people to know in order to "create individuals" of your liking is absolutely wrong. And yes,KGB. No matter if you are creating believers or non belivers. You have no right to do that. This is not about faith but about the value of freedom of information and knowledge. Other people complained about the pages he was editing as well. Stating the God does not exist is what? A scientific fact? It is nothing other than his opinion. Regarding the exudes page the claim that everyone agrees it is a myth is wrong. And he knows that but does not except other views. This page is full of all different kind of theories of respected views and there are a lot more that are missing from the page. https://he.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/יציאת_מצרים_בביקורת_המקרא

Removing my comment is your right apparently but every person has that right to the freedom of knowledge and education! These pages are a insult to everything wiki stands for. Laylaor ( talk) 16:34, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Any indoctrination is wrong and feeding the information you want people to know in order to "create individuals" of your liking is absolutely wrong. And yes,KGB. No matter if you are creating believers or non belivers. You have no right to do that. This is not about faith but about the value of freedom of information and knowledge. Other people complained about the pages he was editing as well. Stating the God does not exist is what? A scientific fact? It is nothing other than his opinion. Regarding the exudes page the claim that everyone agrees it is a myth is wrong. And he knows that but does not except other views. This page is full of all different kind of theories of respected views and there are a lot more that are missing from the page. https://he.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/יציאת_מצרים_בביקורת_המקרא

Removing my comment is your right apparently but every person has that right to the freedom of knowledge and education! These pages are a insult to everything wiki stands for. Laylaor ( talk) 16:37, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

You've again mistaken Wikipedia for a democratic society where social freedom, personal expression and the liberty thereof are values placed above all other. In such a society McCarthyism is a malignant prejudice designed to silence opinions and constrain political thought. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. A book. An online repository. The people who are making it are doing a job. They're working and they are adhering to a basic set of management principles. If this were a company, like the marketing department of coco cola for example, it would be perfectly reasonable for the company to have principles, which say, "no - we don't want that". And to enforce them if employees persistently acted in contrary.

For some reason, because a group of editors have objected to your contributions and you have found no support, you accuse the project of being Machiavellian, whereas the reality is that your content has been looked at (ad nauseam) and has been rejected.

You are required to disclose COI here. Just like you are required to sign NDAs or exclusivity contracts if you work for coco cola.

In fact the only real difference between this organization and a company is that we don't fire or sue people when they come into the office and spend all day bending the ear of everyone they meet, telling colleagues what a bunch of pigs we and the company are for not seeing eye to eye with them.

In a nutshell - its OK for Wikipedia to have policies, its OK for Wikipedians to decide they don't like certain content and its OK to exclude that content from our pages.

Edaham ( talk) 04:05, 4 January 2019 (UTC)