Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:26, 25 February 2009

January 2009

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:2008–2009_Israel–Gaza_conflict, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Creez34 (talk) 00:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Gaza Conflict

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. I've noticed your recent activity on Operation Cast Lead, specifically as pertaining to Gary Grant. Please consult the three revert rule before proceeding on editing that section, or you may place yourself in violation of Misplaced Pages policy. Please let me know if you have any questions, and I mean that honestly. I remember what it was like my first few weeks editing, and I'd like to help you in any way I can (though I'm hardly a WP guru). Saepe Fidelis (talk) 23:07, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for warm welcome :) I'm not an expert in Misplaced Pages abbreviations. I would like in good faith to ask you to let Gary Grant opinion be. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 00:31, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Please do not removed sourced material without bringing it up for discussion in the talk page. Nableezy (talk) 03:53, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Which change are you referring to? I'd be glad to discuss. Sorry I'm weak at wikipedia etiquette. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 04:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Specifically the removal of the paragraph that the UN says Israel has acknowledged that the militants were not firing from within the school. If you want to add something like that this does not preclude militants from firing in the vicinity of the school, fine but get a source (I know there are sources for this, just dont have them at the tip of my fingers) But it would be better before making these kinds of edits to discuss is in the talk page, no big deal but just so people dont start accusing you of vandalism. Nableezy (talk) 04:20, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to 2008–2009_Israel–Gaza_conflict, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Yes AgadaUrbanit please come to the Talk:2008–2009_Israel–Gaza_conflict page to discuss edits thank you. RomaC (talk) 06:45, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 23:09, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Youtube

In you edit, you used Youtube as a source. Youtube isn't a reliable source.VR _talk 02:01, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

IDF Spokesperson's Unit has opened a channel on the website YouTube. This is official IDF source. This is how information is distributed these days. It is hardly unreliable. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 02:25, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Please use the talk page

Concerning this edit , I would appreciate that you write a reason for your edit, and to use the talk page to discuss your action. The photo met the conditions set forth by all sides, if you object, you should voice your opinion on the talk page before removing components like the image. Thanks --Falastine fee Qalby (talk) 18:22, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I've already expressed my opinion on talk page Photos section. I oppose this picture, without hurting anyone feeling. I think it does not represent Gaza conflict casualties fairly. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 00:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

In an attempt to find some consensus, are there any pictures in particular you feel fairly represent Gaza conflict casualties? --Cdogsimmons (talk) 03:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I hope as fog of war slowly settle down in Gaza and foreign press and independent observers enter we will see more credible facts. There were a lot of false claims around what WP call Zeitoun incident which some will say are part of traditional Hamas war practices. It is very sad that UN so easily, without any investigation, took part and repeated those claims. Sources of this picture are not verifiable this is why I oppose this picture. Hope you see my point. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 07:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Greetings, Agada

Does your name mean something in another language, like Hebrew? It is quite musical on the tongue. Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that I appreciate the work you are trying to do on the Gaza article. I see that the others have joined in in reverting your edits and warning you on your talk page. They seem to have swarmed the talk pages of all who disagree with them. I agree with your view of the UN and Hamas war practices. Best wishes. Tundrabuggy (talk) 05:47, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

hello

I am actually in America, my parents came here from Egypt. And I do not necessarily believe everything I read on BBC, specifically the uncorroborated accounts you are referring to. But I do think that we, as editors of an encyclopedia, should try to take a wider view of the events. I think you are overall doing a good job, but some of your edits seem to try blame Hamas for these events, which even if it were true shouldn't be done in an encyclopedia. Thanks for the message though, and take care. Nableezy (talk) 04:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I think you should look at WP:3RR and these edits (http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=2008%E2%80%932009_Israel%E2%80%93Gaza_conflict&diff=prev&oldid=266091813

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=2008%E2%80%932009_Israel%E2%80%93Gaza_conflict&diff=prev&oldid=266061460 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:2008%E2%80%932009_Israel%E2%80%93Gaza_conflict&diff=prev&oldid=266060389 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=2008%E2%80%932009_Israel%E2%80%93Gaza_conflict&diff=prev&oldid=266044580 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=2008%E2%80%932009_Israel%E2%80%93Gaza_conflict&diff=prev&oldid=266009507 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=2008%E2%80%932009_Israel%E2%80%93Gaza_conflict&diff=266153293&oldid=266152871) I am not going to report you, as I said before you seem to be acting in good faith, but you should seek consensus before adding that line as a number of editors have already reverted it. I also think you should probably self-revert the latest addition until the conversation finishes up. Thanks, Nableezy (talk) 19:22, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 19:54, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

"Hamas chose this area..."

Hi Agada, I appreciate what you are saying but "...heart of Gaza city was chosen by Hamas Gaza government for military installations" is not supported by the source. That's mainly why I reverted, because the content does not reflect the source. RomaC (talk) 11:44, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

AgadaUrbanit, please don't blanket revert my edits. You re-introduced nmistakes I fixed. The source says nothing about "international law". It says only that they were counted as civilians by the PCHR. Said Siam and Nizar Rayan were not "military commanders". The first was the Minister of the Interior and the second a spiritual leader. Tiamut 16:05, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is not a reliable source. Please provide sources that state that both individuals were "military commanders". Please also explain the relevance to the section on casualties. I already replied to your other comments in the relevant section on the talk. Tiamut 16:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

AgadaUrbanit, with all due respect, your failure to understand the key policies ofWP:CONSENSUS and WP:OR and your continuing restoration of material that defies both policies is more offensive that my supposed lack of etiquette. I am trying to friendly but firm my friend. Do not add original research to the articles. Do not add material not supported by the sources cited. Do not repeatedly re-add material once others point out these kinds of problems to you in it. Discuss, find better sources and gain consensus. Thanks. Tiamut 18:33, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

AgadaUrbanit. I reinstated my edit once after making it. While I am glad you read my talk page, you did not read it very closely, since you would not have called me a "naughty boy" (I am, as noted on my page, a married woman). Anyway, I'm not warring with you. I suggest you read the comments of others and reply substantively before you go about reinstating the edits you have repeatedly (as noted above by Nableezy). Thanks. Tiamut 22:11, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Emek Hefer covers a huge land area. Which settlement do you live in? If you would rather not say, that's okay. Tiamut 13:59, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

hey

thanks for the apology... I had assumed some weird tech thing anyways :P--Cerejota (talk) 08:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

yeah, sorry if i seemed snappish. there has been alot of name-calling and i just jumped to that conclusion. didn't mean to assume bad faith. Untwirl (talk) 08:24, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I also take the opportunity to say that while we don't always agree, I feel we listen to each other closely, and try, mostly successfully, to understand each other. That represents the best side of the BRD process, and hence wikipedia. Rational discussion promotes rational results, even if it is slow as molasses.--Cerejota (talk) 19:43, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Yusef the Farmer

I do support your point on the "Israeli army admission" - even reliable sources have unreliable information form time to time so that's why we have WP:V. However, that a farmer was shot after the cease fire seems to me to be a verifiable fact - however, I see it generating too much debate. This was obviously a "fog of war" shooting - not an ill-willed ceasefire violation. A sentence with sourcing should be enough, in my opinion. --Cerejota (talk) 20:30, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

The director of ambulance services

Absolutely, I have a little time since I have been banned from the Gaza conflict article. How do you want to go about it? Shall I start it in a sandbox or do you want to start it? If you like, I could start it in my "sandbox" and give you a link for you to add information and get it a bit up to "snuff" before putting it up. Let me know. Tundrabuggy (talk) 15:57, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, I haven't really got to much, but here but did start it. Please fill it in and I will too, a bit later in the day. We might want to look for some personal details about this fellow, like where and when he was born etc. See:User:Tundrabuggy/sandbox1 Best, Tundrabuggy (talk) 15:53, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, I lied. I haven't got a little time, I'm afraid. And looks like you don't have much either. Anyway, it will keep. I wanted to ask you though, what your personal opinion is of what the title of that article ought to be? Myself I am conflicted. I do know that the article as it stands does not reflect the current title. Tundrabuggy (talk) 03:39, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

The farmer

Agada, could you please join the discussion here? I'm not interested in edit warring and I'd like to hear your explanation of why not ordering the incidents by the order of their occurrence and thus, reverting my edit. Thanks. --Darwish07 (talk) 22:11, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Civility barnstar

You've been really civil in the discussions regarding the latest gaza war, thus I give you this little barnstar ;):

		Civility Award
		Sincerely, I award you a barnstar for your civility in the 2008-2009 Israel-Gaza conflict debates. --Darwish (talk) 12:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

You can move it to your user page if you like. Regards. --Darwish (talk) 16:43, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I second this barnstar ;) I was about to give it!--Cerejota (talk) 19:17, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Illegal use of weapon enforced by law

It's funny because when someone, Egypt I think, qualified for the world cup years ago there were AK47 bullets whizzing past the balcony of my apartment in Abu Dhabi. No one seemed to mind. :) Sean.hoyland - talk 10:30, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Although I have never agreed with Israel occupation policies, we have to admit that their internal economical and political conditions is a way more better than the Arab ones. --Darwish07 (talk) 21:32, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

removal of talk page section

Agada, please do not remove sections from the talk page, the archiver will not work like that. It will take them out after a lil bit, and we need them to point back to past discussions. Thanks, Nableezy (talk) 19:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if I did any damage. I believe that closed discussion could be removed. Could you point me to WP rule describing correct procedure? 10x AgadaUrbanit (talk) 20:08, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

WP:TALK, what you did is a total violation, if in good faith. Usually to close a discussion we use {{discussion top}}, a two part template, so be sure to read its documentation. Then you wait for the bot to archive. --Cerejota (talk) 21:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Or just wait for it to be archived after a set time elapses after the last comment. Nableezy (talk) 21:15, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Removal of casualties chart

Agada, you removed a chart that had been in the 2008–2009_Israel–Gaza_conflict article for a month or more. Please seek consensus on Talk for this sort of editing. RomaC (talk) 19:30, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

On a related note please stop making the same disputed changes every day. Nableezy (talk) 20:22, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

You have the proverbial patience of Job

It does get frustrating sometimes, and becomes difficult to assume good faith when some editors behave like a wall, imposing themselves between what we know is accurate and fair and the article. I think you really deserve that Barnstar and think it was great of Darwish to offer it. Hope all is going well with you. Just wanted to say "hello" and "best wishes", Tundrabuggy (talk) 05:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Palestine-Israel enforcement

As a result of an arbitration case, the Arbitration committee has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, broadly understood. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad editing restrictions, described here and below.

• Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.
• The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.
• Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.
• Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently WP:AE), or the Committee.

These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.

Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary.

This notice is only effective if given by an administrator and logged here.

PhilKnight (talk) 12:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

1. Hodge, Nathan (2008-12-30). "YouTube, Twitter: Weapons in Israel's Info War". Wired. Retrieved 2008-12-31.