Revision as of 05:15, 30 May 2007 editShadowbot3 (talk | contribs)51,520 editsm Automated archival of 2 sections to User talk:RolandR/Archive/Archive 01← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:52, 30 May 2007 edit undoGogo Dodo (talk | contribs)Administrators197,922 edits Re: Vandalism reportNext edit → | ||
Line 105: | Line 105: | ||
Hello — I've removed your report at ]. That page is intended for cases of simple and persistant vandals who have received a final warning. ] only appears to have one abusive edit. Sock puppetry should be reported at ]. Happy editing! — ] <FONT SIZE="-2">]</FONT> 11:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC) | Hello — I've removed your report at ]. That page is intended for cases of simple and persistant vandals who have received a final warning. ] only appears to have one abusive edit. Sock puppetry should be reported at ]. Happy editing! — ] <FONT SIZE="-2">]</FONT> 11:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC) | ||
:Looks like a complex case. Most of the IPs don't seem very persistent though, so maybe semi-protection is the way to go? I suppose problems like this are inevitable when dealing with politically-charged topics. Best of luck — ] <FONT SIZE="-2">]</FONT> 04:39, 29 May 2007 (UTC) | :Looks like a complex case. Most of the IPs don't seem very persistent though, so maybe semi-protection is the way to go? I suppose problems like this are inevitable when dealing with politically-charged topics. Best of luck — ] <FONT SIZE="-2">]</FONT> 04:39, 29 May 2007 (UTC) | ||
== Re: Vandalism report == | |||
Re : No warnings were issued at the time of the report on AIV. You , I , and then you . The warning issued previous to yours was for edits in March. With anonymous and potentially shared IPs like this one, warnings are not necessarily cumulative like user accounts or non-shared IPs. While the edits you reported were certainly egregious, a warning should still be issued before the report to AIV. Additionally, your warning and report to AIV was done nearly two hours after the last edit occurred and was reverted by another editor. -- ] 18:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 18:52, 30 May 2007
This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 60 days are automatically archived to User talk:RolandR/Archive/Archive 01. Sections without timestamps are not archived. |
Welcome!
Hello RolandR, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- 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 Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! JFW | T@lk 22:10, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Your Story
Hi RonaldR, While searching for stuff on MS, I found this link . It sounds like you have an amazing story! Happy Passover ابو علي (Abu Ali) 15:49, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the Coffee and Baklava! I was not familiar with the 1970s Maavak group, but I'll have a look around. ابو علي (Abu Ali) 17:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
sorry, i didn't understand the user talkpage policy...
apparently it's ok to remove warnings from the pages of other users to help them avoid the WP:3RR, sorry, i didn't understand the user talkpage policy... Jaakobou 06:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
btw, i request you remove the nicname "idiotic" from the message you've left on huldra's page. Jaakobou 06:14, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the tea!
..it was lovely! And yes; my user-page was vadalized for the first time ever, by the vandal. I will take that as a compliment. What I don´t understand is that somebody will spend so much time showing the world their childishness and vulgarity. Unbelievable. Anyway, I freely admit: I am now wikistalking you! ;-) As for the "blog" at "blogspot"; surely there must be some way to shut that down? Have you contacted those who run the blog? Regards, Huldra 15:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, of course I have contacted the blog hosts. They replied "Blogger.com and Blogspot.com are US sites regulated by US law. Blogger is a provider of content creation tools, not a mediator of that content. We allow our users to create blogs, but we don't make any claims about the content of these pages. Given these facts, and pursuant with section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act, Blogger does not remove allegedly defamatory, libelous, or slanderous material from Blogger.com or BlogSpot.com. If a contact email address is listed on the blog, we recommend you working directly with the author to have the content in question removed or changed." This was not very helpful! There really isn't any point in contacting the anally-obsessed Kahanists who edit the site, even if I had an address. RolandR 15:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Whaw, I had no idea that one was so unprotected! That is rather scary. -Huldra 15:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
personal attacks
please remove: "I saw that you had reverted several of User:Jaakobou's silly and senseless edits to my Talk page" from Huldra's talk page. Jaakobou 21:47, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
With regards to your comments on Talk:Shimon Tzabar: Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.
solve disputes in the proper manner rather than teag team reversions with Abu Ali and name calling (i.e. "childish"). Jaakobou 14:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- The edits were indeed silly and childish. I have made no comment about the editor. RolandR 16:45, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info about the ANI. I personally would not support long block against him. I believe that the most poweful propganda against Zionism is the conduct of its adhereants. Many people will have be alienated by his ideas and his manner. Misplaced Pages would not be Misplaced Pages without the likes of jaakobou. And fortunately he can do no harm here except to his own cause. But I agree that he should not post links to libelous material here. And this edit does imply tacit approval of the bots attacking you.
- Anyway I do feel honoured that Jaakobu chose to attack me in the same breath as your good self . Who knows, I must be doing something right! ابو علي (Abu Ali) 19:59, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
The Guradian Persuit
your comment is requested here: . Jaakobou 14:18, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Jewish defense League
It's obvious you have no interest in knowing the truth about the JDL. They are not listed as a terror organization, and no where on the Internet are they published as such. I confirmed this with the FBI on Friday and I suggest you do the same. From your edits it appears you are against Zionism so your edits have a natural reason to be against the JDL and I suggest you refrain from editing that page as you may have a conflict of interest. eternalsleeper
Steven Plaut
Welcome back. I see this article is protected again. Hopefully there will be some way of moving forward toward a consensus version. Let me know if I can be of assistance in discussion at the article's talk page. ··coelacan 01:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- It may also interest you to know that there was an investigation of sockpuppetry regarding this article, but negative results on the two accounts checked. Hit my talk page if you need me. ··coelacan 01:54, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. I had intended to submit the same checkuser/sockpuppet request, as I am certain -- irrespective of Jpgordon's findings -- that these are linked accounts. Further, I believe them to be linked to User:Truthwinsout, who earlier made similar edits. In fact, they are very likely Plaut himself, or his associates; and probably linked to the User:Runtshit vandal who persistently defaces pages with abuse of me and others. Anything you can do to help would be appreciated.RolandR 14:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Deir Yassin
Hi there Roland. I've noticed your support of my edit on the DY page.
Amuroso on the talk page just posted a link which he claims contains an outright denial of the DY massacre from Milstein. While I still think it breaches WP:UNDUE to give equal billing to Milstein's views over the 160+ books that have endorsed the massacre claim, it might be helpful in the talk page debate to get a confirmation of what Milstein has actually said in this article, as well as the date the article was published and maybe even a partial translation of the article's more important points. Since you apparently read Hebrew yourself, would you be interested in helping out in that regard? Thanks, Gatoclass 03:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry Gatoclass, I'm blocked at the moment and can't add anything.
But the only Milstein link I can find is to a book I do not have, and which is unlikely to be available in London. I don't intend to buy it for this purpose!RolandR 10:11, 28 April 2007 (UTC) - I've found the link on the talk page, and will check it for you later. RolandR 10:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Counterpunch
I not sure if your still banned or not, but when you get unbanned could you come to the talk page and give me some back-up. Some zionist hoodlum named anti-fascist is trying to post the thing about Alan Cabal and Ernest Zundel again and sadly Bobfrombockley seems to be supporting him. I think these charges are flimsy at best and are nothing more than a transparent attempt to bias the article against counterpunch. I feel I need some back-up on this so could you help me out please. annoynmous 19:49, 28 April (UTC)
- As it happens, I don't really disagree with those edits. I would probably rephrase some of it, but the substance is to my mind valid, and documented.
- However, I agree with your anger at User:Antifascist's libellous attack on you. I think that you should consider placing an abusive edit summary warning {{subst:Edit summary personal 3}} on his talk page RolandR 21:33, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- I understand your concerns and I know how sincere they are, but I think in this case they are unfounded. This article is already has enough accusations against Counterpunch of anti-semitism and this point it's starting to feel a little overloaded with this type of criticism. Nothing Cabal or Mcgowan have said has directly endorsed Holocaust Denial and I don't think Counterpunch should be berated because they publish articles by them. The question is there anything in counterpunch that directly endorses holocaust denial and the simple answer is no! It seems rather silly to criticise and organization because they feature articles by these people when nothing in these articles can construed as holocaust denial. If you have a criticism of them than go after them, not counterpunch because they dare to allow them to speak freely.
- I have said before that I'm fine with adding Israel Shamir to your Jew against Zionism criticism, because beleive it or not I actually believe theres more of a reason to criticise counterpunch over him than over Atzmon. I actually think that atzmon, although crude in his phrasing is simply misunderstood, whereas Shamir seems to me like a right winger who seems to have fooled people into thinking he's a left-winger.
- Neverthless thank you for your support in regards to anti-fascist's comments. I guess I was just asking for support in case I get threatened with a ban if I stick up for my views too hardly. However, I fully understand if don't wish to get involved, who needs the aggrevation right?
- I hope you get unbanned and keep fighting the good fight. annoynmous 01:25, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Invitation
WikiProject Palestine is looking for editors to help build and maintain comprehensive, informative, balanced articles related to Palestine on Misplaced Pages. Start by adding your name to the list of members at WikiProject Palestine. Ahlan wa Sahlan! Welcome! |
Tiamut 16:15, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Your stalker again
. I noticed you vandalism page and thus user has the name Roland in it. --Abnn 23:32, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Your report
Hello — I've removed your report at Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism. That page is intended for cases of simple and persistant vandals who have received a final warning. 84.109.51.71 only appears to have one abusive edit. Sock puppetry should be reported at Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets. Happy editing! — Feezo (Talk) 11:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- Looks like a complex case. Most of the IPs don't seem very persistent though, so maybe semi-protection is the way to go? I suppose problems like this are inevitable when dealing with politically-charged topics. Best of luck — Feezo (Talk) 04:39, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Re: Vandalism report
Re your message: No warnings were issued at the time of the report on AIV. You reported the vandal, I removed the report as noted, and then you issued a warning. The warning issued previous to yours was for edits in March. With anonymous and potentially shared IPs like this one, warnings are not necessarily cumulative like user accounts or non-shared IPs. While the edits you reported were certainly egregious, a warning should still be issued before the report to AIV. Additionally, your warning and report to AIV was done nearly two hours after the last edit occurred and was reverted by another editor. -- Gogo Dodo 18:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC)