Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:56, 29 January 2008

Welcome!

Hello, Paul K., and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• 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 need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Arnoutf 16:24, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks, Arnout! For some time I have been active in Dutch Misplaced Pages, so I have gained some (limited) know-how. One comment: in English Misplaced Pages I have not yet found any instruction with regard to spelling. I wonder if I am correct in assuming that British and US spelling are equally allowed. Paul kuiper NL 20:07, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Generally, the following apply:

• Use one spelling (British, US, Canadian, etc.) throughout the article.
• The original author of the article decides upon the spelling. Use whatever the original author used.
• Articles specifically dealing with the UK usually use British spelling, and articles about the US use American spelling. European articles are mostly using British spelling.

User:Krator (t c) 23:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Paul kuiper NL 23:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Netherlands

Thanks for your addition to the Netherlands article - I look forward to contributing together to make this article better, up to WP:GA or WP:FA standards. User:Krator (t c) 23:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Talk Mabel

I agree, I have taken the section out of the talk page. Arnoutf 17:26, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Fine, thanks! I have to leave now, but I think this anonymous user should be reported. Paul kuiper NL 17:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Please read original 1917 text

http://en.wikipedia.org/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917#Text_of_the_declaration Zeq 15:40, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Shalom, where do you leave in the Netherlands ? The definitely don't speak English there, do they ?

---

So when the commanders of Operation Dani are standing there and observing the long and terrible column of the 50,000 people expelled from Lod walking eastward, you stand there with them? You justify them?

"I definitely understand them. I understand their motives. I don't think they felt any pangs of conscience, and in their place I wouldn't have felt pangs of conscience. Without that act, they would not have won the war and the state would not have come into being."

You do not condemn them morally?

"No."

They perpetrated ethnic cleansing.

"There are circumstances in history that justify ethnic cleansing. I know that this term is completely negative in the discourse of the 21st century, but when the choice is between ethnic cleansing and genocide - the annihilation of your people - I prefer ethnic cleansing."

And that was the situation in 1948?

"That was the situation. That is what Zionism faced. A Jewish state would not have come into being without the uprooting of 700,000 Palestinians. Therefore it was necessary to uproot them. There was no choice but to expel that population. It was necessary to cleanse the hinterland and cleanse the border areas and cleanse the main roads. It was necessary to cleanse the villages from which our convoys and our settlements were fired on."

---

(c) Survival from the fittest, Ha'aretz. Ceedjee (talk) 18:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Please explain what you mean by this mysterious message! Paul kuiper NL (talk) 01:25, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I should have guessed you would even not have recognized the text. Sorry for that. Ceedjee (talk) 19:03, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Re:Your comments

At the Talk:Arab citizens of Israel page ... I wholeheartedly agree. Tiamut 23:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for this comment. Maybe you can also write it on the talk page of the article, where it has more relevance. Paul kuiper NL (talk) 17:10, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Please stop the edit war . Thank you

"Undid destructive revision; stop this edit war, please! See talk) (undo) "

I have edited this just once where you seem to revert many times. so please stop now before it is too late. Zeq (talk) 20:17, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Hallo PalestineRemembered, I wonder if you follow the article Mohammad Amin al-Husayni. There is an interesting discussion there if the holocaust in Europe was initiated by Hitler or by this person. I would be interested to learn your opinion. Paul kuiper NL (talk) 23:30, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm watching this article. It's obviously completely unencyclopedic. Husayni's collaboration with the Nazis is being used as a racist smear on millions of victims of atrocity - and it's a substantial black mark on Misplaced Pages that this ethno-specific hatred is allowed free reign.

In the meantime, Nazi collaborators with a lot less excuse for their behavior are being white-washed eg the Stern Gang.

Even truly evil people like Rudolf Kastner (and see Kastner train) can't have their astonishing crimes properly documented. Kastner seesms to have taken $millions from a few 100 Hungarian Jews to save them (along with fifty-two of his own relatives and members of the Israeli Labour Party, Mapai) - while tricking some 400,000 others onto the trains to their deaths. Everyone in Israel knows this happened - how come WP is written to keep everyone else largely in the dark?

There are a few things about Husayni that are interesting - but if you don't engage your e-mail I'll not pass you anything. Even pro-Israel sources actually rate him of slight importance during the war eg "relative inefficiency of the Hanjar division and the total incompetence of the other two divisions". Statements like "Tens of thousands of Jews outside Yugoslavia also perished when the Mufti argued against trading them for German POWs held by the Allies" are brandished - when they actually mean nothing atall!

So his real historical interest is in the way the Palestinians were muzzled and cheated. Husayni was made their leader - but only in matters religious. He had no power, no influence and no money. By 1920, with a convinced Zionist imposed on Palestine as High Commissioner, the Zionist Commission already had a 100-strong government running in parallel with the administration. They'd already run rings around the military occupation forces, ably helped by string-pulling in London. Just in the first year, Samuel made Hebrew an official language, made arming the settlers an official (though secret) policy and set about robbing the under-people of their land.

So this article doesn't matter much - and Husayni, along with the Palestinians, has been so extensively smeared in credible books and articles in regularly reliable sources that any kind of fair treatment of him is pretty much impossible anyway.

And more than that - it's un-encyclopedic of you to want to take out the work of others. Concentrate on putting in your own - the whole topic of Israel is a good place to start because there's masses of really good information that's either never been entered, or has been edit-warred out. The founders of that state set out to rob, and carried out appalling crimes in the process - that's what needs documenting, not a worthless playboy like Husayni. PR 11:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Invasion or intervention

I neutralized the section and stopped an IP's vandalism.
It is not to start an edit war with somebody else.
I have sourced the word "invasion" : Yoav Gelber, Palestine 1948, 2006 - Chap.8 is titled : "The Arab Regular Armies' Invasion of Palestine" but kept the general title of "intervene".
You don't have the right to delete this. The best you can do it to find scholar references that talk about "intervention". Ceedjee (talk) 10:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

► This morning, when I saw the word 'invaded' had been reinstated, I decided already to leave it there as I do not care too much. But the reference to Yoav Gelber is, of course, nonsense. That one Israel right-wing historian (and Tzomet member) uses the word invasion obviously does not prove anything. I will leave the word 'invaded' as it is, but I would advise you to remove this awkward reference.

And I do not know by what authority you tell other editors that they do not have a right to make the edits they deem necessary. I would appreciate a more civil attitude. Paul kuiper NL (talk)

So, Yoav Gelber would be nosense because somebody wrote what you refer to on his wikipedia article (The Reference) but you never read any of his books or publications, and never tried to find what his "peers" said about him.

Ceedjee (talk) 12:31, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Saudi Arabia

On what do you forge your comment that Saudi Arabi didn't intervene ?
Ceedjee (talk) 10:28, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA: Palestine-Israel conflict

Hi Paul!

You might be interested in this RfA (here).

Cheers, pedro gonnet - talk - 09.01.2008 07:33

re: spelling

before i revert you (i see that you've reverted others in the past and they've reverted you as well) can you explain the logic behind inserting the british spelling of neighbors/neighbours into the six day war article? SJMNY (talk) 19:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Revert limitation

Based on your actions at Six-Day War and in light of Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles, I am applying the following sanction:

• You are placed on revert limitation. You are limited to one revert per week per page on all pages related to the conflict area (Israel-Palestine), excepting obvious vandalism, subject to a 24 hour block per violation. Reverts must be discussed on the talk page. This restriction expires in 30 days (28 February 2008, 00:00 UTC) unless extended.

-- tariqabjotu 04:46, 29 January 2008 (UTC)