Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:54, 19 April 2009

Emigration to pre-State Israel

Welcome, and thanks for creating an account. Ostap 01:05, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I have a question for you. It says Schwartzbard wanted "to emigrate to Palestine, then under British mandate of Palestine."

The article on the British mandate of Palestine says it included "Jordan, Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip".

Wouldn't it be more correct to say he wanted "to emigrate to Israel which was then under the British mandate of Palestine"? Ostap 01:14, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Lea Nass

FYI, the 2003 central committee vote still counts as a primary. The source used in the article calls it by that name several times. Also, please try to be a bit more helpful in your editing, i.e. by providing sources at the first time of asking for changes that contradict other sources, and by not leaving old references in articles referring to statements which they do not make. Cheers, пﮟოьεԻ 57 20:28, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

The link you provided is the University's library website. Is there no better evidence? -- Nudve (talk) 12:27, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Please don't provide references where you have to do a search like this one. If you can't link direct to a page, don't bother doing so. пﮟოьεԻ 57 13:39, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Arabian Penninsula

This page has been vandalized repeatedly by editors that do not check the citations, or read the talk page. Please don't continue your habit of making wholesale deletions of well-cited material. harlan (talk) 09:09, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

You referring to my edit as vandalism is not appropriate behavior. Stop it and stop inserting irrelevant and POV material even though it is heavily cited. Mashkin (talk)

Mashkin, the entry on page 61 of the Merriam-Webster's Geographical Dictionary for the Arabian Peninsula indicates Arabia or Arabistan are synonyms for the peninsula, and that in early times the peninsula was divided into Arabia Petraea, Arabia Felix, and Arabia Deserta. The very same entry also explains that the northwest part of Arabia Petraea included the Sinai Peninsula (which isn't considered part of the modern Arabian Peninsula). No reasonable person is going to argue with historical facts that an Admin can find in the dictionary.

Eilat Israel was located in Arabia Petraea and even Jabotinsky admitted that the ancient Kingdom of Israel included territory on the Peninsula. Stop vandalizing the article harlan (talk) 15:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Who cares what Jabotinsky "admitted" or not. There is a certain common definition for the Arabian Peninsula which *all* sources support: Encarta, Metropolitan Museum, Britannica and also Merriam-Webster's Geographical Dictionary (accept that they also explain historical terms). The fact that at some point in time a term that had the root "arab" in it referred to other places is completely not to the point. Your attempt to make the Arabian Peninsula include all the area of the levant is pure vandalism and should stop! Also watch your language! Mashkin (talk) 15:53, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

This issue has also been discussed at User talk:EdJohnston. EdJohnston (talk) 17:15, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Your edits to the Arabian Peninsula article have become disruptive. Any further deletions of well-sourced material will result in requests for administraive action.harlan (talk) 06:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Jonathan Pollard

Grammar and Syntax corrections made

Commutation Precedence: There is always a basis to justify motives by a president, even if it's monetary. It's a president's final legacy, and if his aides had found a precedence to justify Pollard's clemency, they would have presented it to him; but they didn't bother to research it. There was absolutely no historical gain for Bush to aid Pollard, without a presidence.

Peres is current: Bush phoned him and he spoke about Hitler, but remained silent on Pollard, just like the world remained silent on the Jews of Europe in 1933. It was an irony and a juxtaposition that should be re-inserted from the horse's mouth.] "The only world leader to comment on Mr Bush's outreach, Mr Peres, praised Mr Bush's support for Israel and the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, saying: 'Had the world acted against Hitler the way you did against Saddam Hussein, the lives of millions would have been spared.' " He should have said "ditto for Pollard..." thanx. Furtive admirer (talk) 17:45, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Puerto Rico was an unincorporated territory, not a US State. It was an ALLY, as is Israel, which some consider almost the same as Puerto Rico!! Really, the fact that Truman took the first step for an attempted murder on his own life, illustrates a PRECEDENCE OF COMPASSION AND A GESTURE OF DIPLOMACY. As previously stated, presidents, like judges follow the lead of their predecessors when determining executive decisions. It is their legacy they are most concerned about. Truman was DESPISED, but history has proved otherwise. (FIRST PRESIDENT TO RECOGNIZE ISRAEL AS A STATE) That, mr. maskin, is the precendence to which I was referring. YOU CAN SPELL IT OUT: HARRY TRUMAN WOULD HAVE COMMUTED POLLARD'S SENTENCE DURING HIS TERM AS PRESIDENT IF THE REQUEST WAS ON HIS DESK. And George Bush would have reconsidered if he knew about the puerto rican case. Precedence is the only way Pollard will be released and it should be included on the page. Furtive admirer (talk) 19:29, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Please use the talk pages of the appropriate articles.

What you write is your interpretation and speculation and has no place in the Pollard article. Mashkin (talk) 19:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

February 2009

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. The recent edit you made to Arabian Peninsula has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Alansohn (talk) 17:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

That is not an accurate description. the issue has been much debated in the talk pages and the user is trying to insert information not consistent with the current definition of the Arabian Peninsula.Mashkin (talk) 18:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Meretz, Sasson, Mechinat Rabin, settlements

What's you point exactly? I didn't create the Mechinat Rabin page or add in the news? Are you paying attention to what is going on anymore or are you just so infatuated with hounding me? Your edits are disruptive to the improvement of WP. You repeatedly remove legitimately sourced information that opposes your POV and also blindly add material that you yourself are not even sure of. I was almost willing to accept some criticism, but I see that you seem to have a problem on many other pages as well. --Shuki (talk) 22:51, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I am not interested in arguing with you, but with improving Misplaced Pages. I am sorry that you feel hounded, perhaps it is the consequence of your less than appropriate editing and your aggressive behavior that I have pointed out before. Please be to the point. Mashkin (talk) 23:04, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Man, I've been in many of these arguments before with editors who have nothing new to say. They take your words and then spit them back out you in return. Listen, you've made many legitimate and contributing edits in the past and you should continue to edit articles that you are more familiar with. In contrast, when it comes to these articles, it seems that your are too emotionally attached and unwilling to accept any edits that oppose your POV and worldview. You can do much better. --Shuki (talk) 23:11, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Haim Arlosoroff

You said that what I wrote was an "unecyclopedic paragraph." I'm new to editing Misplaced Pages, so can you explain what you meant by that? Everything that I wrote I cited, which to me seems more than enough. I did not delete what was already written, but instead added to what was already there and significantly lacking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shuki18 (talk • contribs) 04:26, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Arrogance

Mashkin. I call your consistent behaviour on WP simple arrogance. You have a strong opinion about some issues and show that you are almost always unwilling to even develop any constructive discussion, compromise, or improvement to edits by editors you have targeted as adversaries. You cannot accept contrary information or criticism and seem to take advantage of low traffic to police these articles. If you don't like someone's contribution, you merely remove it. This is very disruptive. --Shuki (talk) 22:21, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Talk out of expectation

Hi,
You started a talk on my Talkpage with section title "Misleading comment in 3RR Violation". Please withdraw that unsubstantiated judgement. Especially, but more too, I do not appreciate the word "misleading". Then you ask for explanation afterwards. I suggest further Talk on the Admin-page where the subject started. But first: please change your edit there. Thank you, -DePiep (talk) 01:08, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Also Do you really want to join him is a threat into something somewhere. Please revert.=DePiep (talk) 07:24, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I repeat my request: please alter your text I refer to here. -DePiep (talk) 15:13, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Not granted. Please stop bothering me. 16:24, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Reported as a threat on Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard. -DePiep (talk) 23:02, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

RE: This is your text. Threats not welcome on my Talk, so I'll drop it here. Eat it yourself:
==Misleading comment in 3RR Violation==
comment about my editing may be understood to imply that I violated WP:3RR. I hope you are not claiming it. Please clarify what you mean.

There is a very clear case here of an editor that violated WP:3RR despite being asked not to (and has done it again after my complaint). He also repeatedly calls my editing "vandalism", even though he was told not to do so. Do you really want to join him? Mashkin (talk) 00:55, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Uncooperative editor

It has been very frustrating to work here lately and given that you seem to fail time after time begin edit wars and lack a wish to attempt to resolve any disputes. I have no other choice but to assume that you are plainly acting in WP:BADFAITH. You seem to have taken WP:OWNERSHIP of some articles and simply disrupt any edits that you feel are not to your opinion. This is very uncooperative. --Shuki (talk) 18:27, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for sharing your opinion about me once again. Needless to say I never developed any WP:OWNERSHIP feelings to any of the articles I was involved with. I will continue with my efforts to improve Misplaced Pages. Thank you for the encouragement. Mashkin (talk) 18:47, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

3RR

Hi there, you appear to have violated Misplaced Pages's Three-revert-rule by making 3 reverts within a single page in a 24 hour period. You might want to cancel your last revert. --Shuki (talk) 23:38, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Definition of Violating 3RR (from WP:3RR: "Contributors must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period, whether or not the edits involve the same material, except in certain circumstances."

Would you care and point out where I have violated this rule? Mashkin (talk) 23:57, 18 April 2009 (UTC)