| Revision as of 23:12, 23 January 2011 view sourceClueBot III (talk | contribs)Bots1,372,459 editsm Archiving 1 discussion to User talk:Supreme Deliciousness/Archives/2011/January. (BOT)← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:10, 24 January 2011 view source HJ Mitchell (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators121,814 edits →Discretionary sanctions: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
| * - . ] (]) 19:59, 23 January 2011 (UTC) | * - . ] (]) 19:59, 23 January 2011 (UTC) | ||
| == Discretionary sanctions == | |||
| In accordance with ] and the of uninvolved administrators, I am hereby informing you that you are banned from editing any page or taking part in any discussion (regardless of namespace) related to the area of conflict covered by the case, broadly construed. This restriction is in place for 62 days from the expiry of your current block (1837, 24 March 2011, UTC) and, if necessary, will be enforced by escalating blocks. | |||
| You may appeal this sanction at any time to the relevant noticeboard, currently ], or directly to ArbCom. ] | ] 05:10, 24 January 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 05:10, 24 January 2011
/
Question
Hey SD, been following the discussion between you and GHcool on the Hezbollah talk page. You've been arguing that Hezbollah is only considered a terrorist organization by Israel, the United States, and the four other countries listed in the article, and therefore the "Islamic terrorism" category shouldn't be used. I'm not convinced enough to support or oppose it at the moment, but I had a question for you: If the STL ends up indicting Hezbollah (as is currently rumored), will that change your stance? You've argued quite often that Israel's presence in the Palestinian territories is considered an "occupation" in the worldview, based on United Nations statements to that effect. And I agree with you. However, in the interest of neutral equality, if the United Nations makes a statement labeling Hezbollah a terrorist organization, will you consider that to be the worldview as well? It won't happen for some weeks or months, but if it happens I think the "terrorist" label for Hezbollah would then become the worldview. What are your thoughts? Cheers. ← George 13:32, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
- In the case of the OT, then the vast majority of all countries have voted and said they are occupied, this is not the case of the STL which I'm not sure represents a worldview but only the tribunal. So its not really the same thing. I'm not even sure that even if the STL would claim that Hezbollah was behind it, that they would label it as a "terrorist organization". --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:31, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
- Hmm, interesting point. I know the bombing of Hariri has been described as a "terrorist attack" by multiple sources, but I agree it would probably be a WP:SYNTH leap to say that it makes whoever perpetrated it a "terrorist organization". It'll be interesting to see if the UN passes some resolution addressing Hezbollah directly when the tribunal finishes its mandate. Anyways, thanks for sharing your thoughts. ← George 02:31, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Israel's borders
Since you write about Israel's borders prior to 1967, would you mind directing me to the peace agreements that establish Israel's borders? Leifern (talk) 21:39, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
- Would you mind directing me to the factual occurrence where Sinai, WB, Gaza and GH are within Israels borders? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 18:16, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Synagogue in Saragosa
Hello! I am turning to you as an author of an article Ancient synagogue (Barcelona). I need a free or Wiki-usable image of synagogue in Saragossa, like here: http://aragonguide.com/622/aragon-guide-place-zaragoza-jewish-quarter--aragon-pyrenees.html, http://aragonguide.com/images/74b02136ddc02fe6aa36146267cf9b48old-synagoge-zaragoza.jpg. I need it it badly for a big article in a Russian Misplaced Pages on Hasdai Crescas (the single picture in this article provided by me.) (Russian: Крескас, Хасдай), who lived his most important years in Saragossa. Pictures of Jewsih quarter there will do good too. I would be very grateful! Great thanks, --lkitross (talk) 07:38, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not an author of that article. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:06, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Coord template
Saw your question at WP:HD. Although some coord templates work with decimal coords, there's a simpler option — take out your calculator, put in the part of the coords after the decimal, multiply by 60, subtract the number before the decimal, and multiply by 60 again. The number that you subtract after multiplying by 60 the first time is the number of minutes, and the number that you get after multiplying the second time is the number of seconds. Nyttend (talk) 21:54, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Finkelstein
I reinstated your excision of the anti-Zionist description. It's sourced, and it's not a controversial description. As labeling with an emotional component, perhaps a different location in the article would be better. But the fact that Finkelstein doesn't concur is definitely not grounds for removal. It's not his PR page, it's an encyclopedia article. Tapered (talk) 08:47, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello
Hello. You are mentioned here --
January 2011
Notice to administrators: In a March 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."
- I did not revert 3 times within 36 hours, I did not at any point make more then 1 rv within 24 hours. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 18:48, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
- 36 hours was actually a typo; it should have said 48- fixed. You reverted at 10:12, 21 January 2011, 10:23, 22 January 2011, and 10:23, 23 January 2011. If that's not gaming the system then nothing is. Courcelles 19:29, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
- I did not revert within 48 hours either. Thats some reverting against a user who is forcing his pov into the article, there were at least 4 (or 5) editors who objected to that cat with only GHcool wanting it in. The talkpage shows clearly that there is no consensus to have them, and me following what happened at the talkpage and not breaking the 1rr is not "gaming the system". --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:40, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
- 36 hours was actually a typo; it should have said 48- fixed. You reverted at 10:12, 21 January 2011, 10:23, 22 January 2011, and 10:23, 23 January 2011. If that's not gaming the system then nothing is. Courcelles 19:29, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Can someone copy this to Enforcement as a reply to Courcelles and Ghcool?
{{adminhelp}}
Reply to Courcelles: I did not revert 3 times within 48 hours. I did not at any point make more then 1 rv within 24 hours. Thats some reverting against a user who is forcing his pov into the article, there were at least 4 (or 5) editors who objected to that cat with only GHcool wanting it in. The talkpage shows clearly that there is no consensus to have them, and me following what happened at the talkpage and not breaking the 1rr is not "gaming the system".
Reply to GHcool: In June 2009 Ghcool repeatedly added the cats.
Although I was not there at that time, I was told that "We have discussed them before, and only GHschool kept adding them."
Ghcool also notified WP Israel, , and not any Arab notice board.
At the recent talkpage discussions, only GHcool wants the cats, no one else, (These two comments are by two socks: )
Me, Funk Monk, Lihaas and علی ویکی all object to its inclusion.
I have not "moved the goalpost" as GHcool claims, I have always said the same thing, I objected to its inclusion based on that its a minority pov only held by a handful of countries and individual people, and GHcool has still not shown any source saying anything else.
I never removed the views by those academics he had added, but they are povs by individuals that Hezbollah is "terrorist" not facts, they are minority views. So I added the British Mp and U.S. Representative views in the same position, not as "facts" but as views from those people. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:33, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Discretionary sanctions
In accordance with WP:ARBPIA#Dscretionary sanctions and the consensus of uninvolved administrators, I am hereby informing you that you are banned from editing any page or taking part in any discussion (regardless of namespace) related to the area of conflict covered by the case, broadly construed. This restriction is in place for 62 days from the expiry of your current block (1837, 24 March 2011, UTC) and, if necessary, will be enforced by escalating blocks.
You may appeal this sanction at any time to the relevant noticeboard, currently WP:AE, or directly to ArbCom. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 05:10, 24 January 2011 (UTC)