| Revision as of 17:44, 3 December 2010 view sourceNableezy (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers56,155 edits →How do you stand it?← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 18:08, 25 December 2024 view source Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,293,067 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Nableezy/Archive 58) (bot | ||
| (998 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <!-- {{Contentious topics/aware|a-i|blp|ap}} --> | |||
| <div style="text-align: center;">I was smoking the other night and I began to violently cough. I coughed so hard that I pulled a muscle in my back. So what did I do next? Smoked some more to try to ease the pain.</div> | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| | algo = old(10d) | |||
| |archiveheader = {{talkarchive}}{{atn}} | |||
| | archive = User talk:Nableezy/Archive %(counter)d | |||
| |maxarchivesize = 50K | |||
| |counter = |
| counter = 58 | ||
| | maxarchivesize = 50K | |||
| |minthreadsleft = 2 | |||
| | archiveheader = {{aan}} | |||
| |algo = old(14d) | |||
| | minthreadstoarchive = 1 | |||
| |archive = User talk:Nableezy/Archive %(counter)d | |||
| | minthreadsleft = 2 | |||
| }} | |||
| {{archive box collapsible | |||
| |auto=long | |||
| |<inputbox> | |||
| bgcolor=transparent | |||
| type=fulltext | |||
| prefix=User_talk:Nableezy | |||
| break=no | |||
| width=25 | |||
| searchbuttonlabel=Search | |||
| </inputbox> | |||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{Archives|collapsed=yes|image=none|search=yes}} | |||
| __TOC__ | __TOC__ | ||
| == ] updates == | |||
| == User page == | |||
| You were asked not to have other editor's comments on your user page without context in a way to shame them at ANI. If you do not remove the two lines I will take it to AE.] (]) 18:00, 19 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Follow-up: I have simply unarchived the last discussion at ANI. ] (]) 18:10, 19 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :And it looks like it is acceptable. I would have appreciated it if you would have used the full context but you again prove that you are by far the most disruptive editor in the topic area. My only hope is that I can reach that level of disruption without a lengthy topic ban as well. Have fun.] (]) 19:02, 19 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::Really, I am the "most disruptive editor in the topic area"? It isnt the editor who says he is "anti" an entire group of people, and then piles on to say that Islam has "historically been problematic"? Have I ever made any comments about your ethnicity or faith? Dont bother answering, just, in the words you recently used, . <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 00:55, 20 November 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| == Ledenierhomme ? == | |||
| + <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - ''']'''</small> 19:52, 19 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Cant say I care yet. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 00:57, 20 November 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| :Starting to care, lets see if that itch goes away. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 19:30, 24 November 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| ::Now I am really interested, Ill see what I can find. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 00:54, 30 November 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| . <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 19:39, 1 December 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| == Note == | |||
| :Hi Nableezy. I see that Jaakobou has seen fit to restore a talk page comment which you had previously removed; at the same time, and without any apparent sense of irony, he accuses you of "disruptive behaviour". Meanwhile, as you may have seen, he has repeatedly (and falsely) accused me, both on ] and on my own talk page, of making personal attacks, making several offensive remarks of his own in the process. Do you think that his behaviour has so far overstepped the line of what is acceptable that a formal complaint is warranted? And if so, where would be the appropriate forum. | |||
| :With (genuine) respect.--<span style="font-family: Papyrus">] (])</span> 11:39, 21 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::Hello Roland. I think he has indeed stepped over the line, but honestly I think this charade is too funny to report. I have yet to see you make a single personal attack on that page, yet he repeatedly insults you and says you have attacked him? But thats just me, I find humor in stupid shit. If you have a problem with repeatedly being called a dick and a disruption, hard to imagine you wouldnt, Id say the best place to go would be AE. Combine Jaak's repeated insertion of phrasing in a BLP for which there was both no source and consensus on the talk page for not including with his repeated failure to abide by the conduct policies of this website and there should be a lengthy topic ban for this user. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 15:49, 21 November 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| == Shikabala == | |||
| Well, the article also has to be written in such a way that it makes the actual notability apparent; the version I saw was horribly written, so I couldn't suss out the intended claim of notability at all. However, looking at the page again I see that there was an older version of the article which was valid, and then got overwritten with a piece of crap in the past couple of days — so I've restored the older version, but left the recent edits in the trash can. ] (]) 00:23, 23 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :No worries. Just so you know, here's the actual text of what the article looked like when I first deleted it: | |||
| {{hat|old article}} | |||
| * ] | |||
| MAHMOUD ABD AL RAZEK ] HE IS EGYPTIAN PLAYER AND HE WAS BORN IN 5/3/2010 IN AL HSAYA VILLE./ASWAN/EGYPT HE STARTED PLAYING IN ZAMALEK SPORTING CLUB WHEN HE WAS 14 YEARS AND HE PLAYED 2 YEARS IN ZAMALEK WITH THE FIRST TEAM AND HE WENT TO BAWK SLONEKY CLUB IN GREECE AND HE WAS THE DEER OF ]'S FANS AND THE GREEK NEWS PAPERS DECRIPED HIM HE IS "THE GREEK REVALDO" BECAUSE HE HAS Special SKILS AND FREESTYLE IN HIS LEFT FOOT HE WAS IN THE WAY OF Dutch Premier League IN | |||
| ] BUT HE FIND The problem of recruitment IN EGYPT،after that he went again to the white castel "zamalek" in 2006 | |||
| ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ | |||
| ]:180 | |||
| ]:73 | |||
| ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ | |||
| ] | |||
| he started with the egyptian team in 2005 since now | |||
| ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| African cup 2010 | |||
| __________________________ | |||
| ] | |||
| World cup 2007 | |||
| _______________________ | |||
| ] | |||
| egptian legue 2003/2004 | |||
| EGYPYIAN CUP 2002/2008 | |||
| AFRICAN SUPER CUP 2002 | |||
| EGYPTIAN SUPER CUP 2002 | |||
| Saudi-Egyptian Super Cup 2003 | |||
| ________________________ | |||
| {{hab}} | |||
| : Blech, huh? ] (]) 00:35, 23 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Al-Azhar Mosque == | |||
| Hi Nableezy, | |||
| I've finally submitted for FAC an article I've been working on for 5 months. Now that I have that monkey off my back, I'm able to devote much more time to the ] article. I've started doing a close copyedit of the text, and added some useful links, and I'll continue to do that for the next few days. Of course, if there's anything you object to, please feel free to revert it. Is there anything else on which you'd like me to focus? Do some research, look for some sources, summarize or paraphrase a source you already have? I'd like to take your lead on this, because I don't want to overwhelm your efforts, and you obviously know the material much better, but I'm eager to help in any way you'd like. Let's get this thing done! ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 03:54, 24 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :All right, Ill dedicate myself to working on this. A break from another area is probably called for. I got the material I need to expand the architecture section so Ill work on that for now. Ill try to get the outstanding questions on the talk page answered. Thanks. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 19:19, 24 November 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| :But if you have any thoughts on how to organize the architecture section Im all ears. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 19:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| ::I've been working my way down from top to bottom (it's easier for me to assimilate the material that way), so I haven't gotten to that section yet. In general, I would suggest working chronologically, but I'll look at the section, mull it over, and give you my thoughts. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 04:35, 25 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::Having read through the architecture section (though not copyedited it yet), I think the existing organization was fine, except for the "Current status" part, which I moved to the bottom. I think a chronological description of the evolution of the structure will be easiest for the reader to understand. By the way, I like your recent additions in the other areas, they're really helping clarify/complete the material there. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 00:14, 28 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Im working through Creswell, he starts with a history and then goes into detail on the architecture. So Ill probably be stepping on your toes with edits to the history section, though I should be done with that in the next few days. Then Ill focus on the architecture section. There are still some outstanding questions on the talk page, Ill try to get to those after I work Creswell into the text. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 07:27, 28 November 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| == ] == | |||
| As you can see I'm in the middle of writing the article. Wait until I'm finished and then if you think it's not important enough, suggest it for deletion. That's common wiki courtesy. ] (]) 18:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Common "wiki courtesy" is to not recreate articles that had already been deleted. In fact it is not "wiki courtesy" that says this but rather it is ] (G4). You have recreated an article deleted by consensus. If you wish to do that you should be going to DRV. Ill be tagging that as qualifying for CSD G5 shortly. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 18:20, 25 November 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| ::How could I've known that the article was deleted? I've started to write an article about Lindsay while writing an article about UNRWA's chief ]. Ging talked about Lindsay's report in an interview. I've looked for this man and saw that there is no article about him, so I started writing one. I first heard about mr. Lindsay while reading the interview twenty minutes ago. As I was not in the deletion arguement before, you should've deduced that I don't know anything about it and refer me to it through my talk page. That's what I mean by courtesy. Nevertheless, I'm not as proficient as you in wiki procedures so I'll be much obliged if you'll explain what are "DRV. Ill" and "CSD G5". ] (]) 18:36, 25 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::You would know after I made my edit, as what you reverted, without comment, had a link to the AfD that resulted in the original page being deleted. DRV is "deletion review", it is the process used to contest the result of an AfD, whether it be keep or delete. You can read about it ]. CSD is "categories for speedy deletion", it is a set of rules for what may be deleted without discussion. One of those rules is material that has already been deleted following a deletion discussion. You can read about is ]. Finally, to the problem with reading an interview and making an article. Misplaced Pages has rules for what may be acceptable articles. Those rules include demonstrating that the subject is "notable". This requires citations to third party reliable sources. Your "article" is nothing but a collection of quotes from papers written by the subject, that is not a single citation to a reliable third party source is provided. That is not what Misplaced Pages articles, especially ], should be made of. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 18:45, 25 November 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| ::::Thanks dude. Now I know more about wiki procedures. When I write on Wiki it is usually focused articles and I don't spend much time editing others - hence why I'm not so proficient in these rules. I'm still writing the article, and I'll try to do it by the wiki rules you presented. Give me a chance and then I'll be glad to hear any comments or criticizm. ] (]) 19:23, 25 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::If you want to do that you should do it in your userspace. You could for example make the article at ]. Once complete you could post to DRV and ask if people feel your draft should be moved in to article space. What you shouldnt do is revert the redirect, and you really shouldnt revert two different users who restore the redirect. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 19:31, 25 November 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| ::Hi dude. I've incorporated Lindsay's info inside UNRWA's page, thus expanding the James Lindsay section there. I think it makes UNRWA's page a little cumbersome, what do you think? What do you say about me creating a special page for the report, i.e. ] or something to that nature, or is it best to leave it as is? BTW, Thanks for all the wiki tips. ] (]) 14:57, 30 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::I dont think that material needs to be given such in-depth coverage at the UNRWA page, it is a single person's opinion about a very large organization. If there are enough '''third-party''' sources covering the report an article on it would be fine, but you cant write an article on the report and use the report itself as the source. You need to get secondary sources actually covering the report. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 17:33, 30 November 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| ::::Got it. Leave and learn. I'll start digging in the web. ] (]) 15:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Is criticizm from inside UNRWA of the report, is considered as a secondary soure that covers the report? ] (]) 15:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Yes, but it wouldn't be a third party source so it wouldnt demonstrate notability of the topic. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 15:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| == Interaction ban == | |||
| Under the authority of ], and based on the discussion in , you are hereby admonished for personal attacks and ad hominem comments and are prohibited from commenting on or interacting with {{user|Jaakobou}}, {{user|Gilabrand}} and {{user|Cptnono}} anywhere on Misplaced Pages. Please see ] for the complete scope of the interaction ban. If you believe that any of those editors named above has violated their ban from interacting with you, you may not react to that alleged violation except by the procedure specified in the AE thread above. ] (]) 22:06, 29 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Sorry == | |||
| Sorry Nableezy, I was attempting to revert the changes made without discussion. Surely you it is wrong to move a page without discussion? Or am I wrong?--] (]) 16:06, 30 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Your right and I'm still sorry. I have no idea what I was thinking, thank you for pointing it out to me ] (]) 14:41, 1 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
| You are receiving this message because you are on ] for ]. The drafters note that the scope of the case was somewhat unclear, and clarify that the scope is {{tqq|The interaction of named parties in the ] topic area and examination of the ] process that led to ] ] to ]}}. Because this was unclear, two changes are being made: | |||
| == FYI == | |||
| First, '''the Committee will accept submissions for new parties for the next three days''', until '''23:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC)'''. Anyone who wishes to suggest a party to the case may do so by creating a new section on ], providing a reason with ] as to why the user should be added, and notifying the user. After the three-day period ends, no further submission of parties will be considered except in exceptional circumstances. Because the Committee only hears disputes that have failed to be resolved by the usual means, proposed parties should have been recently taken to AE/AN/ANI, and either not sanctioned, or incompletely sanctioned. If a proposed party has not been taken to AE/AN/ANI, evidence is needed as to why such an attempt would have been ineffective. | |||
| ] (]) 06:29, 1 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks, but I actually dont think I am allowed to comment on that. What I would like to request though is that it be clarified if third parties can post enforcement of these bans, or if it is restricted to the involved parties. Can two people mutually agree to ignore an interaction ban? Id favor that approach over an appeal. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 06:54, 1 December 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| :But to provide my thoughts on an "interaction ban" in general, I suppose it could be useful in certain cases, such as a users repeatedly hounding each other to make disputes, but that isnt what happened here. I said things I probably shouldnt have, so have others. But instead of making up these "interaction bans" in the hopes of making us behave better, you all could just use the already existing tools to make us behave better, ie blocks. If you want to create a more civil topic area, block people for incivility. Even if being uncivil is not a blockable offense, ARBPIA says you can make pretty much anything a blockable offense. So if you want us to behave with greater collegiality, feigned or otherwise, enforce a civility patrol or whatever you people call these things. If I were an "uninvolved admin" and I were looking at this and had the same intentions that the uninvolved admins here have I would do the following. Say that except for actually filing an enforcement request, the named editors are prohibited from commenting about the other editors. That isnt to say that they cannot interact with one another, they just cannot discuss each other. Discussions have to be about content and resolving disputes about the content. Legitimate disputes about content could still be raised in talk pages, and edits to articles can be made without looking to see who initially placed the material in the article. You dont solve anything by stopping us from talking to each other, you do the opposite. I am unable to respond to a comment made by an editor in a discussion about content that I am involved in. I have to instead pretend to be responding to some other person who either agrees or disagrees with the point, or in some cases isnt even discussing it. That strikes me as an absurd "solution" to any problem. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 07:21, 1 December 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| Second, the ] '''has been extended by a week''', and will now close at '''23:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC)'''. For the Arbitration Committee, <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 03:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| : There is nothing to stop you from commenting on an appeal that concerns you. I can't see anyone sanctioning you for that. ] (]) 10:10, 1 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:HouseBlaster@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel_articles_5/Update_list&oldid=1260342644 --> | |||
| ::I dont know, I asked Tim if I should file a separate appeal or just add to that one the response was that I should file a separate one. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 14:50, 1 December 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| ==Io Saturnalia!== | |||
| ::: Okay, it's up to you, I've said my piece on the Cptnono appeal now anyhow. ] (]) 16:07, 1 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::Nothing stops you from commenting there. If you want to appeal your part of the ban rather than just commenting on that appeal, then you should file a separate appeal. ] (]) 16:10, 1 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Tim, you are a smart person. This doesnt seem to you to be an incredibly silly way to accomplish the supposed goal of these interaction bans? What do you think will be solved by saying we cannot interact with each other? A topic area with greater civility, and thus more hospitable to new users? Better content dispute resolution? What if both he who cannot be named and I agreed to interact with each other in a courteous, respectful manner. And if we didnt we would be blocked for escalating lengths of time. Do you not think that would satisfy the goals of this interaction ban, as well as allowing for legitimate content discussions to be carried out? But one last thing. I was given an interaction ban with a user who called me a "disgrace to Misplaced Pages". Besides that person not liking me, why was I given any type of ban for that? What have I done to deserve such a ban? Why wasnt that user just blocked for a personal attack, an attack that was neither provoked nor returned. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 16:25, 1 December 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| ::::Oh, and on your talk page you answered an either/or question with "yes". <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 16:28, 1 December 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| :::::It's perfectly okay to answer "am I ... or does it ...?" with "you are", if that is what you are referring to. ] (]) 00:14, 2 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::One sided interaction bans often turn out to be disastrous, and in this particular case I don't want to take chances. It is hard for us to police every single discussion you and Cptnono may have, and as to civility (courtesy, whatever) paroles, I'll just quote Coren - "We have a long history of civility paroles to have been able to determine without a doubt that they just do not work." (See ). You may notice that I proposed replacing this set of bans with a different sanction in my most recent comment at Cptnono's appeal. ] (]) 00:21, 2 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::ok. I think that restriction would be fine. But also consider adding a restriction on some of the parties involved from commenting on AE threads that do not concern them. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 01:16, 2 December 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| {| style="border:2px ; background-color: #FF0000;" | |||
| ==December 2010== | |||
| |rowspan="2" valign="right" | ] | |||
| --] (]) 19:58, 2 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
| |rowspan="2" | | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 2; vertical-align: left; height: 1.1em;" | '''Io, ]!''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. ] (]) 15:20, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| :Ill pray to whatever god that helps me break 80 (Im kidding God, please dont launch lightning bolts at me). Happy holidays to you and yours {{u|Ealdgyth}}. ''']''' - 16:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== Action requested on Alison Weir page == | ||
| Nableezy, if you are a "Confirmed-extended" editor as I assume, would you be kind enough to take a look at my requested edit of a paragraph in the protected-extended entry "Alison Weir" and take action on it? It just sits there...thanks.... kenfree ] (]) 02:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :"Level headed" is not a description that is often applied to me. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 17:44, 3 December 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
Latest revision as of 18:08, 25 December 2024
Palestine-Israel articles 5 updates
You are receiving this message because you are on the update list for Palestine-Israel articles 5. The drafters note that the scope of the case was somewhat unclear, and clarify that the scope is The interaction of named parties in the WP:PIA topic area and examination of the WP:AE process that led to two referrals to WP:ARCA
. Because this was unclear, two changes are being made:
First, the Committee will accept submissions for new parties for the next three days, until 23:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC). Anyone who wishes to suggest a party to the case may do so by creating a new section on the evidence talk page, providing a reason with WP:DIFFS as to why the user should be added, and notifying the user. After the three-day period ends, no further submission of parties will be considered except in exceptional circumstances. Because the Committee only hears disputes that have failed to be resolved by the usual means, proposed parties should have been recently taken to AE/AN/ANI, and either not sanctioned, or incompletely sanctioned. If a proposed party has not been taken to AE/AN/ANI, evidence is needed as to why such an attempt would have been ineffective.
Second, the evidence phase has been extended by a week, and will now close at 23:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC). For the Arbitration Committee, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Io Saturnalia!
.jpg)
|
Io, Saturnalia! | |
| Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:20, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
- Ill pray to whatever god that helps me break 80 (Im kidding God, please dont launch lightning bolts at me). Happy holidays to you and yours Ealdgyth. nableezy - 16:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Action requested on Alison Weir page
Nableezy, if you are a "Confirmed-extended" editor as I assume, would you be kind enough to take a look at my requested edit of a paragraph in the protected-extended entry "Alison Weir" and take action on it? It just sits there...thanks.... kenfree Kenfree (talk) 02:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)