User talk:Catherineyronwode/2006

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.

Welcome to Wikipedia, Cat!

Hello, Catherineyronwode, and

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

well i just heard the "famous ashtrays" for the first time [thanks] and feel that i am a better person for it. I am a dj on

KLDK and just did a show alternating songs produced by Brian Wilson and Phil Spector - so just played Barbara Ann a week ago and just did not know what i was missing. Life is good. Carptrash

03:08, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey cat, I added a Notable Wikipedian tag to your article, so it now appears in thatcategory.--Cúchullain ^t/c 01:19, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Good evening. Glad to see you have found your way here; gladder to see that you have found this article and chosen to improve it, especially since you have already been cited as a source. Hope you stick around and improve articles on related subjects as well.

Tous beaux régards — Smerdis of Tlön 04:05, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

I've read through your message on Talk:David Southwell; it looks fine to me. Just though I'd point out one small thing – when you leave messages on "talk" pages (be they user talk pages, like mine, or article talk pages), make sure you sign your comments by typing "~~~~" (four tildes) after your message. When you save the page it will automatically change into a signature. This makes it clear who has left which comments on a busy page.

If you need help with anything else, don't hesitate to ask – Gurch 20:44, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Greetings. I hope I am not envious of your evil eye expertise. Could you supply a reference to Alan Dundes' study? Lambiam^Talk 23:12, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Never mind, I've already added it to the article. Lambiam^Talk 23:51, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

For the ref to the Frederick Elworthy book, see Evil_eye#References. Lambiam^Talk 12:30, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Alphabetization in categories is produced automatically. It is set to go by full title, thus "List of Nigerian writers" is alphabetized under "List". It can be made to do differently by using the "pipe trick", so if you want that alphabetized under "Nigerian" rather than "List", you have to go to that article and edit it to [[List of Nigerian writers|Nigerian writers]]. The reason Category:Lists of writers looks messed up is because the "pipe trick" was used in some articles, but not in others. The only way to fix it is to go to each of the articles that needs realphabetizing and fix them individually. Hope this helps, -- Infrogmation 23:00, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I've created the redirect. Here is how you do it. To make, for example,

#REDIRECT [[Black Herman]]

(I was intrigued by the idea of you wishing to be followed around by a root; a robot is more prozaic.) Lambiam^Talk 01:00, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Will this really attract help? I hope so.

I have an old browser (old computer, old evertthing, and in trying to edit the Magic (pranormal) page, i have run into problems due to article length. I would like to see article reverted to version i edited which is --

23:03, April 16, 2006 Catherineyronwode (ÆSee also - Obeah deleted here as it is now in list of "traditions" -- occultism added, skepticim deleted., order rearranged above)

BUT i also want to have the section Magic in fiction (a new section), placed at the bottom (not before the section on Religious attitudes. When i tried to make that move, my browser could not handle the article length and just screwwed everything up. My apologies for being a cause of added work.

Thanks!

Catherineyronwode 23:30, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, {{

helpme}} again if you need more help.--Commander Keane

23:39, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

An edit tip: Instead of [[TOPIC (CONTEXT)|TOPIC]], you can use [[TOPIC (CONTEXT)|]]: If the original ends with a parenthesized part, and you use a "pipe" with an empty replacement, the result is the original title with the parenthesis left out. Cheers. Lambiam^Talk 00:34, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

You removed the category:occultism from the entry for S.L. Macgregor Mathers alsmost as soon as i added it, and you used as your rational that the article was alredy listed in category:hermeticism. It is aso listed in the category:esotericism, but you did not delete that, which makes your deletion of occultism seem arbitrary. I realize that these three catgories overlap to a certain extent, but i had a good reason for adding the category:occultism tag, namely that Mathers is listed on the page List of occult authors and it i my hope to develop that list into category status in the near future. At prsent i am going through WP looking for occult authors who are unlinked to the list (i have found dozens over the course of the past couple of days). I am also making red links to authors who should have short articles but have not yet been written up. I am intending to write these short pieces soon, and welcome help. In the meantime, since there is no list of hermetic authors, i would welcome your cooperation by re-listing or allowing me to re-list Mathers in categoy:occult preperatory to listing him in category:occult authors (when it bcomes a category). What do you say? Is this feasible for you? Catherineyronwode 04:37, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello. You refer to the removal of

WP:CG for further information. I would also like to support your conversion of List of occult authors into a category, and I have added the mergelist tag. On another topic altogether, I would like to request your help (or suggestions) with expanding Language of the birds. —Viriditas | Talk

09:45, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

• Palo is now a disambiguation page, leading to Palo (religion) and Palo, Leyte.
• I have moved Palo Monte to
  Palo mayombe must now be merged into Palo (religion)
  .

--Commander Keane 19:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, please do call on me if you need help with anything. Writing is obviously the most important part to building this encyclopedia, and I would like to facilitate that in every way possible. At your service, --Commander Keane 20:21, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I have carried out your request in full, with the exception of

Palo mayombe that I redirected to Palo (religion) (to aid in searching, even if the capitalisation is incorrect). I enjoyed reading Palo (religion), the style of prose was particularly satisfying (something of a rarity in this place), thank you for that.--Commander Keane

03:40, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I noticed this discussion because I happened to be "watching"

Peanuts (comic strip), since the latter already exists as a redirect to the former (actually, there's a little more to it — see m:Help:Moving a page for all the gory details). - dcljr (talk

) 17:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Heya - could you add the country-currency of your reward offer? Things are often assumed to be in USD, but the dollar symbol is pretty common and there are non-U.S. dollars in the other reward offers. Cheers, Kickstart70-T-C 01:08, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Done. Catherineyronwode 01:10, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

In your request, you mention a list of red links. Where is this list? Kaldari 20:22, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I came here to ask the same question, because you rather implied first that anyone who meets the criteria is okay, then that there is a specific list somewhere. Regardless, I've got one cooking up... Tuf-Kat 23:00, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Here are some, all in red as of today, May 1st, 2006:

FYI, stub on

Graves Brothers exist. Renata

03:39, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, that's what happens when articles are created by new users on, well, obscure subjects... BTW, I think it schould be moved to some other name, no? Renata 07:04, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

BTW, since these topic hane no/very little info online and one needs book references, could you recommend something? It would help save time. Renata 18:30, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I am adding a potion of a message i left at Renata's talk page here as a reminder to myself: "the poor little stub does need a total of 6 re-directs -- from

I'll do what i can tomorrow [i found your message at 2 AM], but i leave for a two week road trip on Friday [which is actually "Tomorrow", now that i think of it] so i am not sure that i can be of much help for a couple of weeks. I have tried to stay out of these things, but am inclined to respond to any request for assistance. And yes, i remember you well. Carptrash 08:24, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry not to have replied sooner, though you'll have seen that I've had a look at the article and made some comments. I can understand your distaste for the song — and, as I said at the Talk page, it's difficult to see it as satirical. Quoting too much from the lyrics, though, is a double-edged sword: yes, it can serve to show the real nature of the song, but it does so by giving the offensive lyrics more exposure.

This sort of case always raises problems. My own preference (which fits well with Wikipedia policy, I think) is to give the bare facts, and leave it at that. That probably means that the article will be a permanent stub, but that's better than a long-term battle over its contents (an alternative would be simply to redirect it to the Coe article, and merge any relevant material). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:26, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Please restore the existence of an Abramelin page and do not automatically redirect the word Abramelin to the "Sacred Magic of Abramelin the Mage." page you have just created with the text i co-wrote.

The Abramelin page was something that i undertook to rework and expand greatly as part of a project my husband and i spent three days on, namely creating and filling the category of Occut Authors. When you moved the Abramelin article that i had i rewritten away and made the word Abamelin a redirect to a book page, you also deleted the name Abramelin from the category of Occult authors, which i am sure was not your intent.

Please, as a favour for having taken my work on this article away, would you be so good as to start a short Abramelin stub page that does NOT redirect to this book page but is instead connected with a link, not a redirect?

I would do it myself, but i have to go to sleep now and will not be able to wikify for the next two days at least, as we are hosting a large party here at our occult shop. I will get to it when i can and will write more. But since i wrote a good deal of the text you moved, i think i can ask you in all fairness to restore the Abramelin entry so that it can be used as i intended it, as part of the Occult Authors project.

Thanks, Catherineyronwode 10:19, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I was thinking about that this morning! Of course I'll create it. I also wanted to say that I really admire your writing here on the wiki. I look to you as an example. –Frater5 (talk/con) 15:48, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that you wrote the article on

Greetings, I'm one of the Wiki Cleanup crew types, and have been working on the Luck article which I saw you had made comments on. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on the updates and any further changes you would like to see. You can leave comments on my personal page, or in the talk page for luck where I have an open section for the updates. Aces & Eights 21:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Catherine (and husband!),

...Somebody needs to explain this to me quick, because i really am not getting it. Why -- when i asked for help -- was i told by three admins to "just do it" and then when i followed their instructions to the letter, why was the cat slated for deletion?

Don't panic!  The category is not slated for deletion as you or I (or I guess most of the world outside Wikipedia) would understand it, but for renaming to

Yes indeedy, and as a Thelemite, I admire you following your path. But this is about factual relevance in an encyclopedia, not our spiritual preferences. As a little experiment, I did a Google search of "Oil of Abramelin", and discovered what I suspected: with only a few exceptions, all the hits mention Crowley, Thelema, or some reference to his formula. This reflects the fact that the vast majority of people today who know or care about Oil of Abramelin do so because of Crowley/Thelema, either directly or indirectly. And that is the point of a disambiguation page: to point people in the right direction for the info they are seeking. Again, I'm willing to compromise... you could write something like, "a recipe for anointing oil that is mentioned within the book, popularized by Aleister Crowley, the Golden Dawn, and other modern occultists." But this is one of those cases where mentioning Crowley is not only relevant, but not mentioning him makes the page incomplete. –Frater5 (talk/con) 15:30, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Addendum: you write, "This was a year or two before i had ever seen or read a book by Aleister Crowley. So your argument fails on the facts." What was true for you is not indicative of the larger picture, not only then but presently. The 1975 edition of Abramelin is pretty much the one everyone has now, and the back cover of that edition begins with: "Around the turn of the century, when Aleister Crowley was working out his system of Magick, the source he turned to for basics was the system of Abramelin of Egypt." There is a reason that the editors mention Crowley: he is the reason that Abramelin has the popularity it has. Not only is Crowley now highly relevant to the topic 30 years later (as the Google search indicates), but was so in 1975 (as the book editors reflect), going back to the early 1900s when he started writing about it. While your personal experience in the 1960s is worthy of respect and honor, the big picture is clear: as things stand today (and for the last several decades), Oil of Abramelin is intimately tied up with Crowley, and owes it's current popularity to him. This makes a brief mention of him on a small disambiguation page useful, accurate, and relevant. With respect, –Frater5 (talk/con) 18:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I just did the test and found the exact OPPOSIITE results.

Unfortunately, you skewed the test by insisting on the word "Crowley". A straight search for only "Oil of Abramelin" results in the extact hits (I stopped at 42):

You will notice that only 4 of the top 42 hits contain no mention of either Crowley or a clear Thelemic context (2 of which are eBay ads). The hits after 42 also were Thelema/Crowley-related. And yes, intelligent vendors (which you searched for) will make their advertising broad...I'd do the same thing. Of more relevance is how regular people are using the Oil, and a plain search without modifiers clearly shows a very strong Thelema/Crowley leaning. Do other traditions now use it? Of course! That's why a compromise sentence should acknowledge that, such as "a recipe for anointing oil that is mentioned within the book, made popular by Aleister Crowley, the Golden Dawn, and other modern occult traditions." Such a sentence would be both accurate and informative. –Frater5 (talk/con) 02:56, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Geez, I hate to do this to you...but I did a search on "Abramelin Oil" as you suggested, and of the top 20 hits (I didn't look further), only two didn't mention Crowley or have a Thelemic context...and they were both stores (although other stores did mention Crowley by name; one store was a dead link). I don't want to go around in circles, but really...the evidence is on the web, in the literature, and in common parlance: Crowley and Abramelin are tightly bound together in people's minds. This really isn't about being "pro-Crowley", and a mention in this context is not an "endorsement" of him, only an acknowledgement of his high degree of relevance to the topic, both during his time and today. I'm just not understanding why you are resisting allowing a simple contextural reference so that people searching on Wikipedia can get more accurate hits.

Re: By the way, i just saw that there is a new translation of Abramelin coming out soon...which, i have been told, corrects Mathers' Galangal error to Calamus. So what say you to that?

My first reaction is to have a lack of trust of a french to german to english translation....way too many opportunities for subtleties to get lost in translation (too bad we don't have the original Hebrew version, if one existed). However, I know several langauge geeks, and if they say the translation is solid, I'll trust that they're right. If you mean about the recipe...well, that's not a big deal to me. Liber Legis doesn't mention ingrediants (other than olive oil), so if it is supposed to be Calamus, then that's fine by me. Personally, I think the ingrediant that matters is cinnamon, so that the oil has some degree of fieriness (and adds a pleasant flavor to Cakes of Light). Chances are, most Thelemites will continue using Crowley's preferred recipe for the sake of tradition, but I wouldn't be surprised if both versions started showing up. –Frater5 (talk/con) 05:16, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

No, the new English translation ... is directly from the two German copies of the manuscript to English, with critical comparison to the Herbew / Aramaic and French manuscript versions as well.

Ah! Very cool. In that case, I'm very much looking forward to it coming out. I'm not surprised that Mathers did a bad translation, so I'm glad that a corrected version is forthcoming. –Frater5 (talk/con) 18:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

This is just to follow up on my previous messages. It's been a few days since I first e-mailed you, so I just wanted to make sure you were getting my posts. I see you've been contributing in the past few days, but I'm sure you're just busy. Please acknowledge this message when you're free. Thanks, cat!

The e-mail address is [email protected]. Now, I havn't gotten "verified" yet, so I don't know whether or not I can receive money. From my knowledge, though, my balance on the PayPal account will just be +20.00 and when I hook up a savings account to it, I can dump it all into my account. I think that's the way it works; if it is, just go ahead and do it. Otherwise, let me know.

It's been great doing business with you! Cheers.

red

  11:10, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I've been meaning to tell you about this for quite a while (I'm the guy who started the article on you, after all, and it's good to see you on WP).

Several years ago - definitely before 2000, but I'm no longer certain if it was in an essay for university or for grade 12 - I made extensive mention of "Yronwode's Paradox", of which I had learned from one of your FtP columns. I did quite well on the essay, and I'm just wondering if you yourself remember what the Paradox is.

It's become even more relevant these days, after all... DS 14:58, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi, the correct place to request a translation of a German article into English is

Thanks for what you're doing over at Aleister Crowley. The fanboyish adulatory aspect of the article has gotten pretty intense over the last few months; it's easy to understand where it's coming from (especially since I inhabited rather the same place a couple decades ago), but it's a bit embarassing to look at. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 03:03, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

• (However, I should point out that long quotes like the ones you're inserting right now are generally frowned on here.) --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 03:04, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Hang on a little while. The important point is to get the link back in, and I've put that in. I've been able to talk sense to other Thelemites before; I think I might be able to do so here as well. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 03:52, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I think I understand your anger, but I hope you change your mind about Wikipedia as a whole. People do break the rules your critics cite in other places, as you say, but in theory we always plan to fix it later. In contentious matters that often doesn't seem good enough. I think you can add balance while following 'pedia norms, and in fact I will keep trying to do so as soon as I post this comment. Also, please stop repeating your claim that the phrase "one may have influenced the other" means 'some 1908 book influenced Taoism'. Unless I missed the context, it clearly means that Taoism may have influenced the 1908 book. Dan 09:02, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Cat, I want to apologize for my anger yesterday. I let myself get affected by your edits, and I used some inappropriate words. I know you don't like Crowley, and you have some honest reasons. There has to be a responsible, NPOV way to add what you think is needed. Since WP is a community encyclopedia, I think controversial additions need to be created with others. I won't be able to edit today, and perhaps we could both step back a day or two to get some perspective on the issue. I am confident that we can arrive at a mutually acceptable solution. –Frater5 (talk/con) 15:57, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

As I have used the books you cited, and I don't have a physical copy, would you mind using {{citebook}} format in a == Sources == section? Give the information in the copies of the books you used, the specific publisher and all that so we know which version of the book it is in.

KV 20:45, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I haven't found any problem with parts being cut off, that should be fixable with an upgrade. But indeed, I noticed that none of the rest is cited, and sadly Zos is a RL friend of mine (I've even editted from his place). I don't understand why he is acting as he is in these edits, but I think it might be a lack of a firm grasp in policy. Chess is unduly long, but we have much more we can add before worrying about it. I heard about the problem from Zos originally, saw the site as questionable, but in the interest of NPOV. The rest will be a battle, but if we hold in there, they don't stand a chance, because we have NPOV policy on our sides, and their WP:V claims are extremely stringent. I'm going toend up placing {{fact}} fact tags all over soon.

KV 03:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Catherine, your failure to note the book is disturbing at this point. I tried to find a copy myself, found one online in which the page numbers aren't matching up. Which could mean a different version, but I haven't found him saying anything overtly racist yet in what I have read, and you havent' given a version. It almost seems as if they were made up right now. If you can find one of your quotes in this version of the book, I'll forget my fears for right now, but I'm not finding them as I look. [1]

KV 20:07, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but your disturbance is wide of the mark and your fears are misplaced. I think you have me confused with Bo-Bo. He was citing book pages in footnotes, per your request a few days ago; i did not do that. I do not know which editions of which books he used. Please contact him at his talk page.

the above was written by Catherine, she didnt sign it

Yes, Catherine, but we still need to know where it was coming from. Zos 22:51, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I've returned from my long trek across a large chunk of America [and back] and have looked at that DAC song, and appears that things have settled down. Is that how you see it? Carptrash 23:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

i say hello [Lennon & McCartney] it is pretty easy to have a full life without wikipedia but I shall be sad to know that you are not here. I'm not sure which guru's followers you've run afoul of, but it probably does not matter. One of the reasons I stick with Hal Blaine and Memphis Jug Band and Nellie Walker (still working on Nellie) is that they do not have followers. My reason for doing wikipedia is to fill in a few dark corners, to give out some high school student in writing a paper something more to work with and to take the info i have access to and put it out there. But also to meet interesting people and hang out with them on the www. You've been there for a good piece of all that [well,not Nellie Walker] and - as the WWll sing goes, "We'll met again, don't know where, don't know when, but I know we'll met again, some sunny day." Life is good. Einar

Your recent edit to

As per the note on every edit page You agree to license your contributions under the GFDL. - blanking pages is hardly a solution and its not delete'able as you are not the only contributor to the page. As for copyvio I googled it and can't find it anywhere what is the copyvio of -- Tawker 23:33, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Claims were made during a lengthy edit war that the material was MY ORIINAL RESEARCH. I concede to those claims. It is my original research. Wikipedia does not allow OR -- ao WP must take it down. it is online at my site, under my authorial name. See http://www.luckymojo.com/abramelin.html Catherineyronwode 01:36, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

So you admit that:

1. you wrote the material yourself
2. you contributed it to Wikipedia yourself

Right?

Regardless of whether it must be removed due to it being original research, you have still irrevocably licensed it under the GFDL. Any GFDL site, such as Thelemapedia may now use it under that license, even if it is removed from WP. -999 01:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I have written a response, and I'm requesting your attention to the claims you have made against me. Thank you. Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Cite_tags_as_edit_war Zos 23:58, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Based in part on your remarks here [2], I am temporarily blocking you for violating Wikipedia's policy of

Hi, don't know if you remember me, I think I helped you out with something small when you first started. Anyway, I was just reading through Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion (I agree this should never have been listed, you'll be pleased to know I voted keep) and I came across your stricken comment.

If you've found yourself on the receiving end of abuse, I'm sorry to hear it, I know there are people here who can be very unpleasant at times. I suggest you try to keep cool, not take it personally, and seek help elsewhere. I'm always happy to help with any editing-related problems – Gurch 18:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Hey, cat. I'd like to echo Gurch's comments, and I regret that you're having some difficulties with other editors. If you need any help with the non-acrimonious settling of a dispute, well... that's what I'm here for. DS 13:41, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
  • dear C - You have a breadth of knowledge and understanding that wikipedia needs. Take some time off, but please don't slam the door behind you, leave it open just a crack. Or, in the words of
    Zodiacs, "Oh won't you stay, just a little bit longer." Carptrash
    14:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
• Yes, please, don't leave us alone in the cold here. Just don't think about these racism-apologetic Termites or whatever these insects are called for some time. And don't forget to aspand your home from time to time. Your root as ever, Lambiam^Talk 16:05, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, as you did to Abramelin oil. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --999 13:38, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

This page should go in your userspace as a subpage, rather than in the article space. If you are the only contributor, you could copy and paste the content into User:Catherineyronwode/Pages that make no sense. If others have edited it, it should be done as a page move. I can do for you that if you want.

You can recommend pages for deletion by following the process described at

G'day, wondering if you could tell me whether I'm on the right track with Kate McTell. After a few confusing sources I've pretty much concluded that Ruby Glaze was a separate singer altogether (some sources said it was a pseudonym, but since they appear together on some albums, and a magazine clearly stated that he sang with Glaze, *then* married McTell...) Pretty much everything I can find on the web (not much!) about her is in the article now. I'll attempt to complete the discography. Let me know what you think! Stevage 23:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to see you go. I came in to bat for you on the Hargrave Jennings page:

'Elder Goolsbee': (1) Please sign your mail! cf WP:SIG (2) It looks as though you have insulted Catherinyronwode's intelligence ('I hope you can understand these simple truths' comes across as ironic. If it isn't meant ironically, please feel free to say so). If it is meant ironically then that is uncivil. (3) I can see no evidence that Catherinyronwode vandalised your page. She was editing boldly as she is meant to do. (4) You were asked to verify your inclusion of ORMUS materials in the article. It was said that they don't form part of the man's work. I must say that it seems possible to me that you may be failing to distingusih between ORMUS (an Orbitaly Re-arranged M-State element - colloguially called an ORMUS[1] - which I see no evidence on the net of Jennings writing about) and Ormus (possible founder of the Rosicucians - which he is credited with having written about[2]). This suspicion is strengthened by the fact that ORMUS substances were discovered in the 1970s - while Jennings died in the 1890s. You linked him to ORMUS and thus bear the onus. But your response was to refer to 'a book' or 'the book of his that I referenced' by Jennnings. Which book? Please could you now verify your information by reference to named publications in order that concensus may be reached with respect to the conflicting views propounded by you and Catherinyronwode. Thank you in advance! --165.146.132.30 15:31, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

:::Comment moved here from User:Catherineyronwode --Dhartung | Talk 12:06, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I am happy to see that you have returned, and are using your user name (what else are user names for if not to use them?). Kwork 16:38, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I looked you up on Wikipedia and I am quite impressed. I a have Read most of the material you left me on my talk page.a few days ago. I am now going to wait and see where you put the article on occultism and antisemitism. I am still willing to start it for you but I suspect that you intend to do this yourself. I also put off inviting anyone else because of what I read on AnonEmouses TALK PAGE. He or she seems to be a rather wonderful human being.

Anyway instruct me on how to proceed and I will assist you as time allows . I was thinking of just going to some of the other sites with the outline but I was not sure that is what you wanted because of all the mystery around your user name. I think it is probably a good idea to proceed like that.but I want to make sure first. Albion moonlight 17:36, 1 September 2007 (UTC). .

I started Occultism and Antisemitism two days ago, but it was deleted because it had no content. It should be easy to re-start when there is material to put in it. Kwork 21:30, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I attempted to edit at Wikipdia from Febreuary, 2006 through May, 2006 but i am now leaving because the project is little more than a haven for cultists and special interest cliiques, many of them editing under anonymous screen names. I'm off to work on my own site. I may be back, and i may not, but if you are here reading this page, take it from me, don't trust any information you read at WP unless you also check the page's history, see who wrote it, and trust that editor.

Cordially, Catherineyronwode 12:57, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm back.

I took a wiki-break in order to do my own work and to have time to get over my personal anger. I was angry because the

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abramelin_oil&oldid=51730032

• The page as i wrote it and archived it at my own site

http://www.luckymojo.com/abramelin.html

• The WP page as retrived tonight, September 1st, 2007

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abramelin_Oil

For a real good laugh, you might enjoy reading the final (to date) WP editorial comment on why -- in THIS case -- the WP:NOR guidleine would be violated and i would be told to move along:

"Because it's a good article. Why would you want to remove anything? Just b/c wp says it may be removed doesn't mean it has to be removed. -999 09:25, 1 June 2006 (UTC) [[4]]

I guess i should take that as a back-handed compliment.

The editors who asserted their right to castigate me for contributing OR, but then fought like devils to keep my OR at WP anyway are still editing, and the uneasy WP policy of calling writers "editors", even when they are writing completely original research, is still in effect as well.

But, moving on ...

From June 2006 until September 2007, i entered Wikipedia from a series of unlogged-in IP addresses, working, as usual, on

• 64.142.90.32 [5]
• 64.142.90.33 [6]
• 64.142.90.34 [7]
• 64.142.90.35 [8]
• 64.142.90.37 [9]
• 69.108.137.220 [10]

All of the above are my acknowledged edits. (And, by the way, the last IP block is semi-inexplicable to me, given that it traceroutes to Irvine, California, many hundreds of miles south of my home, and my isp's server is in Santa Rosa, California -- but that's the net for ya.)

Also, for the record, despite accusations of mutual sockpuppetry that have been levelled against my husband and me, i have never edited Wikipedia from my husband's usenername account. I do not know his various passwords, although i could probably guess them by hit-or-miss in fewer than 100 tries, if necessary. He has also never edited from my username account, or anonymously, to the best of my knowledge. However, in the interest of full disclosure, i will note that he does know all of my usernames and my passwords better than i do, and i do rely on him to tell me my username and password for any given interface that requires one. :-)

So, after some encouragement from User:AnonEMouse i have returned to my user name. My unburdening, and his or her response, can be found that the appropriate AnonEMouse talk page [11].

And that is all for now.

Catherineyronwode 22:01, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

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.