| Revision as of 14:12, 24 February 2009 editMiszaBot III (talk | contribs)597,462 editsm Archiving 4 thread(s) (older than 6d) to User talk:Jayjg/Archive 27.← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:56, 25 February 2009 edit undoJayjg (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators134,922 edits remove obvious falsehoods and material related to article content. See the Big Yellow Box.Next edit → | ||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
| ::::That is your opinion (and I respect that), however my question is was there a bottom line to the discussion? Was a policy decided upon? Thanks ] (]) 20:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC) | ::::That is your opinion (and I respect that), however my question is was there a bottom line to the discussion? Was a policy decided upon? Thanks ] (]) 20:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :::::There was no consensus either way. If there was ''any'' consensus it was that editors should not go around switching the terms, something ] has decided to ignore. --'']] ]'' 22:44, 23 February 2009 (UTC) | :::::There was no consensus either way. If there was ''any'' consensus it was that editors should not go around switching the terms, something ] has decided to ignore. --'']] ]'' 22:44, 23 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ::::::Consensus and filibustering are kind of polar opposites. Suffice it to say that the facts are entirely on the standard terminology side, as shown in my link above. Using Israel-specific terminology also violates several WP policies, notably ], ] and ]. ] (]) 08:58, 24 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::::MeteorMaker's theories regarding the use of the term "Samaria" were , and despite his incessant attempts at ], there is no consensus to remove either term from any article. MeteorMaker was, in fact, put on restrictions against doing exactly that, and I suspect Pedrito will be as well if he continues. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 01:43, 24 February 2009 (UTC) | :::::MeteorMaker's theories regarding the use of the term "Samaria" were , and despite his incessant attempts at ], there is no consensus to remove either term from any article. MeteorMaker was, in fact, put on restrictions against doing exactly that, and I suspect Pedrito will be as well if he continues. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 01:43, 24 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ::::::That ban was based on what has been by the admin to be a misunderstanding. She promised to lift it, but forgot to do so before she went on vacation. Re your list: and see that even your painstakingly scraped-together ] for the position that "Samaria" is a modern toponym doesn't hold up to scrutiny. You have still not presented '''one''' source that corroborates your claim without large doses of ], and you need lots to match the colossal amount of sources that expressly say you're . ] (]) 08:58, 24 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Help? == | == Help? == | ||
| Line 47: | Line 45: | ||
| Regarding , you may wish to comment at the related complaint I have made . ] (]) 01:52, 24 February 2009 (UTC) | Regarding , you may wish to comment at the related complaint I have made . ] (]) 01:52, 24 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
| == ] == | |||
| ] There is guidance from ] that removal of statements that are pertinent, sourced reliably, and written in a neutral style constitutes disruption.. | |||
| I have not been deleting any material and have provided a multitude of WP:RS sources that justify the inclusion of the material contained in my edits. ] (]) 10:35, 24 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:56, 25 February 2009
| This is a subpage of Jayjg's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
| Thanks for visiting my Talk: page.
If you are considering posting something to me, please: *Post new messages to the bottom of my talk page.
Comments which fail to follow the four rules above may be immediately archived or deleted. Thanks again for visiting. |
 Archives |
|
no archives yet (create) |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 6 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
 | This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
Park Hotel seder attack
I see you have edited this page before, and had dealings with the editor who is now launching a mini-edit war. If you have time, take a look.--Gilabrand (talk) 09:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Alon Shvut
Hello. I have a question. Pedrito has been removing all references to Judea and Samarea from the geographical location of this settlement and all others, saying that this is according to Talk:Israeli settlement. I have looked there and it seems that there was a long argument, but I could not see any conclusions (but maybe I did not look well enough). Since you were involved in that argument, can you please tell me if there was some policy emerging from that discussion regarding the omission of these names? Thank you. Tkalisky (talk) 17:25, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- It's probably one of the most well-sourced facts in WP history. MeteorMaker (talk) 18:12, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info, however I still cannot see the bottom line. Was there any decision to remove all mention of Judea and Samarea from settlement locations? Thanks Tkalisky (talk) 20:21, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- It's difficult to comment on that without commenting on individual editors, but FWIW, there are tons of reliable sources for the position that "J+S" are non-compliant with WP:NPOV, WP:NCGN and WP:UNDUE, and none at all for the opposing position. MeteorMaker (talk) 20:34, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- That is your opinion (and I respect that), however my question is was there a bottom line to the discussion? Was a policy decided upon? Thanks Tkalisky (talk) 20:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- There was no consensus either way. If there was any consensus it was that editors should not go around switching the terms, something User:Pedrito has decided to ignore. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 22:44, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- MeteorMaker's theories regarding the use of the term "Samaria" were conclusively disproven, and despite his incessant attempts at proof by assertion, there is no consensus to remove either term from any article. MeteorMaker was, in fact, put on restrictions against doing exactly that, and I suspect Pedrito will be as well if he continues. Jayjg 01:43, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
- That is your opinion (and I respect that), however my question is was there a bottom line to the discussion? Was a policy decided upon? Thanks Tkalisky (talk) 20:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- It's difficult to comment on that without commenting on individual editors, but FWIW, there are tons of reliable sources for the position that "J+S" are non-compliant with WP:NPOV, WP:NCGN and WP:UNDUE, and none at all for the opposing position. MeteorMaker (talk) 20:34, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info, however I still cannot see the bottom line. Was there any decision to remove all mention of Judea and Samarea from settlement locations? Thanks Tkalisky (talk) 20:21, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Help?
I don't need krep like this. Having a disruptive editor follow me around and disagree with me for the sake of disagreeing with me and reverting my edits is not what I signed up for. THF (talk) 22:44, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
AE
Regarding this, you may wish to comment at the related complaint I have made here. Canadian Monkey (talk) 01:52, 24 February 2009 (UTC)