Misplaced Pages

per talk

usually means something is on the talk page. nableezy - 15:49, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

nuh-uh, i shocked you??? all i had to do was say i havent accepted that press tv is unreliable (note I didnt say I found it reliable, only that it isnt fringe and that I havent accepted it is unreliable). Though if you wouldn't mind me asking, do you find this to be a reliable source? nableezy - 21:39, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to be theatrical; you actually did shock me. I thought you fancied yourself as some sort of moderate, and refusing to take a stance on the reliability of PressTV does great harm to any moderate reputation.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 21:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I actually fancy myself as an extremist who wants to rule the world (which from then on will just be called Egypt), but I dont think the Press TV position is an extreme position to take. Press TV is useful for a number of things as they cover aspects of certain issues that are largely uncovered in the western media. I dont know that I would call it a reliable source on many things, but everything you brought up was in pieces that were not news articles, they were op-eds reflecting the opinion of the author. But Press TV covers internal matters in Gaza almost as well as al-Jazeera. Really, how do expect to achieve NPOV (representation of all notable viewpoints) if you want to cut out the press from an entire nation? And, again, I never actually said they are a reliable source, I said I havent accepted that they are not. nableezy - 21:50, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

If I were you my argument wouldnt be focused around press tv. It would be blp as applied to Netanyahu and Liebermen, basing a negative accusation on the basis of a noted conspiracy theorist. I tell you this because I really dont care about that article or the birther movement or whoever the fuck Orly Taitz is, it is the way a news source that provides valuable information that many western media outlets either gloss over or ignore is being portrayed. nableezy - 05:31, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

and also, if you were interested in upping your DYK count, an interesting article we could together on is this covering the 1990 law and the 2005 addition. nableezy - 05:40, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

It is disappointing that major publications of major countries are as reliable as the Pravda, but that county has been disappointing all of us for a while already. As for the DYK offer, thanks, but I try to avoid Holocaust writing. It gets me too depressed.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 15:34, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Wouldnt really be writing on the Holocaust, just on the mandate to teach it at all levels of school. But up to you. nableezy - 15:37, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

you know that is 3 reverts right? nableezy - 20:38, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I was hoping that by incorporating your concerns we can now move forward to actually building the article, instead of playing wiki-games. In any case, I'm happy to see that you take edit warring seriously. I'll now look for you to set an ideal example of non-edit warring. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 20:44, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

cmon, you remove exactly one problem and return the rest of them? get off it. I will, by the end of the day (my day, around 2 am monday eastern time), have a detailed listing of all the problems with "your version". OK? nableezy - 20:48, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Happy to see there's some headway being made towards actual editing, instead of plain good ol' reverting. Surely, the issues and modifications have been incorporated into the later version with more content. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 19:16, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I would appreciate an answer on the talk page. nableezy - 20:26, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

advice

Could you have a look at Palestinian right of return and tell me how I deal with these people and their IDONLIKEIT tag-team?
Not asking you to get involved, just some advice. Thanks, No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 17:00, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Not sure. Probably depends on which editors you're dealing with. I'll take a look later and see if I can offer more detailed advice. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 01:14, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I decided to do the more important editing first, then argue about the small details, so it's not so urgent anymore. Thanks, No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 20:16, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

OK who put the hex on Muts pitchers?

Ollie now out for the season too? StarM 01:58, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Actually, his injury is a sign that the hex is over.He can stay on the DL for a while, for all most Mets fans care.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 19:16, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I think the fans oare on the DL now too. RIP Mets season StarM 18:00, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

New York is in a pretty polarized state, with you guys doing so great and the disaster we're gong through. This made me cry and laugh. They can't call up any players for the 40-player expansion because they'll be nothing left in the minors. I can't imagine a team has ever has a similar problem.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 06:47, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh I know, shocked when I read that. Sounds as if it's a depth issue for years to come though. Kinda like Jets at QB. Happy weekend! School start back? StarM 00:16, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Help

Hi Brewcrewer. You put something on my page that said if I had a question to see you on your talk page. I was hoping you could help me fix something on the page Irgun. I changed the wording a bit and added a reference for the second sentence in the lede. There is an error around the end of that sentence near where I put the reference and I probably made it but I can't for the life of me figure how to fix it. I wonder if I could impose upon you to take a look at it, when you get a minute? Thanks very much. Stellarkid (talk) 02:21, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

fixed. nableezy - 04:13, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Now I just have to figure out what you did to fix it. Stellarkid (talk) 12:39, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Look at the "diff". Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 19:16, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

talking about people I know? or that you know? Tiamut 21:07, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

That we all know. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 21:28, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I am pretty sure brew means me. But I gave Tallicfan two notices, he disregarded both. I didn't report him until he was edit-warring against 3 users for a total of 7 reverts. Then he reverted again while the report was open, making 8. You want to call that gaming the system go ahead, but it isnt. nableezy - 22:06, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Aftonbladet

Could I please ask you to start discussing beforing making changes that many users will find both imbalanced and insulting. You consider Aftonbladet antisemitic and you're fully entitled to that view. That is very much a minority view, however. It is not a good paper, but neither is it antisemitic, very far from it. For you to label it as such without being able to read its publications (I suppose) when even its critics in the on-going controvery have stated the opposite looks very much like personal POV-pushing. Please take the time to discuss and gain a consensus before making such changes, no matter how emotionally you feel about it.Jeppiz (talk) 05:35, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Please raise your specific concerns at the article talk page, not here. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 05:38, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

I've posted there, please feel free to remove the comments here. CheersJeppiz (talk) 05:39, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

It's fine, but I do wish you would tone it down a bit in your edit summaries.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 05:50, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely, I wanted to change that one the minute after I posted it, so my apologies for that. We do not agree here, but I certainly shouldn't get personal and my edit summary was not a good one. You are of course entirely entitled to making the edits you want. My bad. Jeppiz (talk) 05:53, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Apology accepted. Looking forward to collaborating and discussing at the talkpage. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 05:59, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

ANI

Jaakobou opened a report there about the anon IP's edits to Operation Defensive Shield. I mentioned your name in the course of the discussion and thought I would let you know, in case you have something you want to add. Here's the link. Tiamut 10:54, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Sharp eye

Looks like we have some simptoms of Commonsense dysfunction syndrome (CDS)

Sharp eye from above ( as an American eagle or better) is appriciated http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Haaretz#This_is_summary_of_Landau_discussion

--Rm125 (talk) 18:11, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Difficulty to put a tag because of vandalism.

Sorry to bother you but you asked for it.. I will be brief since Wiki KGB ( Commisar Malik Shabbaz) is watching me ( he already gave me a link to let me know that he knows that I talk to suspects)So I will be brief here because I know he is watching me even here. In fact I used his link to get here..( Hi Malik, How are you,body, please don't forget your pills)In any case I made this Landau shmock piece very short one as Jaakobou recommended but the gang (Relax, Malik cool off this is from love I am talking about you)Shabbaz and Nablezy don't want me to place a tag since they know they gonna loose eventually. I want to ask your advice why they claim they can report me and ban me. Is there any truth in their positiom? What is the a proper way to place a tag so I can attract more opinions? What is the best way to do it? Their strategy is to bury is as much as possible and to scare me off. Thanks. Shabbat Shalom.--Rm125 (talk) 08:27, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey Rm125, Nice to hear you. I'm gonna give you a little tough love now, so my apologies in advance: Calm the fuck down. You gotta chill yelling at everyone.

One thing you have to learn around here is that making sense and being right doesn't necessarily win you the argument. You can't get all hot and bothered about every misjustice that goes on around here or there's no way you'll last. The way of life at Misplaced Pages, especially at Israel related articles, is that there are editors adding stuff and deleting stuff because they either like it or they don't like it. Things are decided by a "consensus", which is the politically correct term for "majority wins." In the Haaretz case, there's a majority that disagrees with you (and me), so there's nothing that can be done at this time. Some of the opposers are just mistakenly applying wiki policy and some are just pov pushers opposing its inclusion because they just don't like it and they want to protect the reputation of Landau and/or the Haaretz.

Sometimes you'll get neutral editors to agree and correctly apply wiki policy and sometimes you won't. But when you lose you just move on and forget about the issue for the time being. You can't go around insulting and yelling at other editors. If Malik Shabbaz wants to follow you around, let him. There's one editor that follows me around to practically every single article that I edit. If you're acting in a civil manner and applying wiki policy correctly there's nothing they can do about you.

I think you're a good guy and would make a valuable addition to Misplaced Pages. I wouldn't give you this little speech otherwise. Sorry if I'm being a bit condescending. Sincerely--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 01:19, 6 September 2009 (UTC),

Thanks for advice. I truly value, yada,yada. I am not as sensitive as it looks-sometimes I enjoy to play roles.May be Hamlet some day... So talk anyway you like as long as it sincere. I've got your point. I came to the same conclusion basically. Look- it's jungle out here. This is the reason nobody takes Misplaced Pages seriously. But it is great tool fot a quick reference and another thing-people are ignorant and lazy. Misplaced Pages is great for lazy.Lotsa Saudis running around and teaching democratic values..I still think there is value to be here. On the other side it is a black hole I wasted lots of time here and it comes with the price. In any case have a goood week and till next yada.yada P.S. BTW the whole Haaretz thing is a learning exersize. Who cares about David Landau?( OK it is a joke, Nableezy. Don't jump around saying rm125 doesn't care. The truth is I don't care or may be I care a lot.. If you want to know fer shur it is "may be", Nablazee--Rm125 (talk) 07:34, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

brew, I know we havent gotten along all that well in the past few weeks, but could you please convince Rm125 to stop calling me a Saudi? nableezy - 07:43, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Rm125: Please stop calling Nableezy a Saudi. There's nothing to indicate that he's Saudi and he doesn't like being called Saudi. And if you want to try not getting blocked again, you may want to chime in at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Rm125 reported by User:Nableezy (Result: ).--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 07:47, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I will voluntarily withdraw the report if Rm125 self-reverts and promises not to continue reverting over the objections of other users. After he self-reverts if you want to remove the material again go ahead. nableezy - 07:55, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Jane Fonda

I'm not well versed regarding issues surrounding Israel/Palestine but I am a little bit concerned with the sudden growth to Fonda's article in regard to the TIFF issue. The first addition seemed fine, I was a little concerned over the second addition, mostly because it seemed to be hammering home a point, but with the addition tonight, I'm more concerned. The last addition doesn't seem to me to be directly tied to Fonda's signing a letter and now seems to me at least, to be using the Fonda article as the platform for the wider issue, and if that is the case, it doesn't belong on the article. On the other hand, I really don't want to get into the middle of the wider issue, so I'm not sure. Does this last seem to be overkill, at least in regard to it being added to the Fonda article? I note that the addition was not made to any other articles , despite the fact that the letter was signed by over 50 people, and then I looked and see that this wasn't added to any other articles by the other editor who posted this latest issue either . This really raises my concern. Thoughts on this? Wildhartlivie (talk) 07:19, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Ever since the Vietnam days, Fonda has been a lightning rod, so I'm not surprised she has gotten the most wiki-attention of all the signers. As for the overkill, you're probably right, but I would sit on it for a few weeks till everyone forgets about it, before going in and proportionating things out.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 07:25, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest

I need to discover whether there is a Conflict of Interest, the obvious thing to do is to ask the people concerned. If this is wrong, then please tell me how I should go about it. The guideline at http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#How_to_handle_conflicts_of_interest says "The first approach should be direct discussion of the issue with the editor, referring to this guideline" 86.157.70.95 (talk) 08:39, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Anne Coulter article

Hi, I'm familiar with WP:OVERLINK.

You might be aware that Misplaced Pages has a function that changes the format of dates to reflect the preferences of each user. But it only works on dates that are wikilinked. I've seen other users rountinely linkify dates for this reason, so I thought it was accepted practice.

But correct me if I'm wrong. Is there anything specific on this in the Manual of Style, other than the general rule against excessive linking?

Regards,

Hibernian (talk) 21:09, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, on further investigation I see that the policy has now been changed. Hard to keep up with things round here.

Manual of Style: "Dates should not be linked purely for the purpose of autoformatting (even though in the past this was considered desirable)."

So I stand corrected. Hibernian (talk) 21:13, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Cool :) Its just that anyone who is reading a biography about Ann Coulter is not that interested in what happened in Mongolia on her birthday, so linking her birthday is useless. My opinion of course. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 21:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

• Historicist (talk) 00:22, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

• Your opinion, please. Would you call this article Sant'Anna, Trani, since the building is now a church, or or Scolagrande synagogue, since it was built as a medieval synagogue? The Great Mosque of Cordoba is now a cathedral and Hagia Sophia is called Hagia Sophia.Historicist (talk) 13:19, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I would go with Sant'Anna, Trani since that's what its called now. The other examples that you give still go with the original name despite the change in status. You can always bold the original name in the lede and include all applicable synagogue categories. My opinion of course. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 13:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Antisemitism and anti-Israel activism

There are now two, well-designed studies published in peer-reviewed journals demonstrating the link between Antisemitism and anti-Israel activism. I have added the material to the article on New antisemitism but my attempt to add it as a sentence to the more important (as in ~2k hits per day) article on Antisemitism has been reverted, bu a lone editor. I think that the findings of theses studies merit a sentence in the New antisemitsm section of Antisemitism. I would appreciate your opinion.Historicist (talk) 22:13, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll take a look at the article, but real-life is sorta taking over these days and I don't think I have time for such heavy wiki-stuff.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 00:13, 9 September 2009 (UTC)