Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:55, 31 January 2007

Welcome!

Hello, Jaakobou, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Cheers, Tewfik 19:08, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Richard Landes

You seem to be saying that because Richard Landes is a respected figure in the field of medieval history, we can state as fact anything he writes on his website, even on topics totally unrelated to that field. By that argument, since Noam Chomsky is a respected figure in the field of linguistics, I can insert anything on Noam Chomsky's website as fact in any Misplaced Pages article whatsoever. By the way, Daniel Leconte has stated unequivocally that he does not believe the al-Dura shooting was staged: see Talk:Al-Aqsa_Intifada#Muhammed_Al-Durrah_caption. Sanguinalis 02:09, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

good points Sanguinalis, but you slightly interpreted the inteview with Daniel Laconte - he does not state anything about the al-Dura shooting but only states that 90 percept of the footage on the full tape is obviously faked and the executives replied to him in the type of "but they are all fake" - there was no mention about his views to the al dura case itself... that's why i think you could say that france2 admitted that most footage from the palestinian freelances is staged. would appreciate your reply, and i do still think that admittance should be inserted somehow.

Jaakobou 14:13, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

But he does talk about the al-Dura case, in the very same radio interview that Landes refers to on his website. It's in the pararaph that starts "Alors voilà, il y a des mises en scène, sauf une." Specifically referring to the theories of Mena ("dire que tout est une mise en scène dans la mort de l’enfant, dans les blessures du père etc" - "to say that everything is staged in the death of the child, in the wounds of the father, etc.") Laconte says "Nous, ce qu’on a vu ne nous amène pas du tout à dire ça, et plutôt même à dire le contraire" - "Nothing we have seen leads us to say that, rather to say just the reverse" Later in the interview Laconte draws a comparison between the evidence provided by Mena to support their staging thesis and that used to support 9/11 conspiracy theories. It's certainly not the case that Laconte makes no mention of his views of the al-Dura shooting. The fact that Landes doesn't mention these parts of the interview in his account is a perfect illustration of why he shouldn't be trusted as a source (in my opinion).

That being said, I agree with you that Laconte's testimony about what was said to him during his meeting with France 2 does merit inclusion in the article. I wouldn't object to it being mentioned in the "Controversy" section of the article. I disagree with it being in the lead. After all, we don't have Talal Abu Rahma's there either. Sanguinalis 01:49, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Hate speech

Refrain from calling those with whom you disagree 'haters'. The information is sourced and factual. If you don't like it, bring other sources which bring different stories. Do not delete information from articles. Thank you. --Daniel575 | (talk) 08:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

excuse me, but sources that lie blatently are not "sourced and factual", it has nothing to do with agreeing to my opinion or not agreeing, it's about propagating hatepseech and then crediting it as a factual source. on that same note, seconddraft.com have been rejected from being cited on the al-dura liable.

Muhammad al-Durrah

Hi, I saw your edit to Muhammad al-Durrah. Keep up the good work, your presence on Misplaced Pages is valued. KazakhPol 18:40, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I see you've done some great work in dealing with bias on Misplaced Pages. If you ever run into the position in which you want a page reverted, but cant because of WP:3RR, feel free to contact me. I am more than happy to assist. KazakhPol 00:45, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

The usual crowd is trying to undo your edits to Muhammad al-Durrah. Your assistance on the talkpage and through reversion is desired. KazakhPol 01:00, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Pallywood.jpg

Please see this message. -- RHaworth 19:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Could you please provide source information for this image? As it stands now it is a possible copyright violation and will be deleted. Tewfik 19:12, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

hello Jaakobouywood! frummer <<-- profound mental retardation.

i believe i gave all the info needed (description and licensing), if you feel a need to protect these propagandists by removing perfectly verifiable images, than it is your problem more than it's mine. Jaakobou 07:31, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with content, but is rather a function of copyright. If the image is lacking in copyright, then it should not have been uploaded to begin with, but now that it has been, it will be deleted unless the proper copyright information can be provided. I have attempted to contact the license holders, but salvaging the image is dependent on their releasing ownership and doing so in a timely manner. Cheers, Tewfik 07:36, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Tewfik, that is the proper way to address this issue, i was refferring to RHaworth. have a good day. Jaakobou 08:25, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Please be careful: 3RR

You have already reverted 3 times at the Lebanon article today. I think you should be aware than exceeding this limit will get you blocked. Be careful. —LestatdeLioncourt 13:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

thank you for the warning, i havn't done it yet and don't plan to do it despite people who support obvious doublespeech as proof to positions *shurg* - drop by the Lebanon talk page, i've made a summary of topic 1 and would like that topic to be reverted/written down properly on the main article. Jaakobou 08:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Helpme

how do I delete an image if i have made a mistake in naming it?

Tag it with {{db-author}} and reupload it with the right name.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 08:50, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Ariel Sharon by Latuff.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ariel Sharon by Latuff.jpg.... copyright status is unclear.

here's the source: , i'm not informed on how to tag images properly, i keep getting notices even when releaing photographer and news agency information. *shrug* Jaakobou 11:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Misplaced Pages:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}}

i should copy paste that one into the image?? Jaakobou 11:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

i tried and failed miserably... could you help me out? Jaakobou 11:10, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

... or one of the other tags listed at Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

... You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

... If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 09:45, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

thank you! Jaakobou 11:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I added the source information for you. It still needs a copyright tag (see Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags/Fair use for some possibilities; I would suggest using {{Art}}, but look through the list, there may be another that's more appropriate) and a fair-use rationale (see Misplaced Pages:Image description page#Fair use rationale for discussion and Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline for some suggestions). To add the copyright tag, just edit the page Image:Ariel Sharon by Latuff.jpg and replace the current tag indicating the lack of a license with the license you want to use. —Angr 20:11, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

hi

Hi Jaakobou,

I wonder what is POV in the material related to the Palestinian Ancestry? There are no proofs of genocide or ethnic cleansing occuring in Palestine since the Ummayid period. For the most of the Umayid period, the land had a christian majority. The Jewish majority was overwhelmed by a christian majority and later Islam.

The Palestinian people, muslims or christians or Jews, are related to the Pre Islamic invasion of the Land. This has been mentioned not only by European hsitorians, but also by many many Arab historians in the region. Documentation of family ancestries particularly for the rural area indicates that these people did not minlge as did people in cities like Jaffa and Jerusalem, who mingled with Egyptians and Moorish people. The article clearly indicates that what we call Palestinians today is a result of a long history of events. Also, what do you mean by Islamist invasion?? Does not make sense to me at all! Almaqdisi 19:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

thank you for approaching me with these two questions, as this material is quite interesting when you go deep into the historical material.

(1) the biggest problem, the way I see it, with the current Palestinain designation is a result of the British designation that gave any person present under the mandate for two years a status of "native palestinain". however, there'd been no accountability on the 500,000 arabs coming in between 1920-1945 in an islamic attempt to keep the entire land islamic by force (by massacring the jews).

(2) that's what i've meant by Islamist invasion... if you wish to read a bit of information on the situation in those days i suggest you start by reading about the yemanite jews and the islamist enfourced maoza exile... this topic is very big though... perhaps you should start with this book Jaakobou 21:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Jaakobou. But this material has been disputed by many. See the demographics section of Palestine article. Thanks Almaqdisi 03:32, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

you asked a question, i gave you a reply. Jaakobou 07:59, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Beirutwoman1.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Beirutwoman1.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Misplaced Pages takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Butseriouslyfolks 03:37, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your note, i'm not yet learned on how to tag images correctly. the image you've noted has been removed from wiki's info since the article it was related to was merged into a different article which does not contain the image.. so as far as i'm concerned, the image could be deleted without anyone noticing... however, i would really appreciate some help with the head image on the Pallywood document so that it will not get deleted just because i don't understand how to tag images correctly. Jaakobou 15:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I understand. You almost have to be a copyright lawyer to figure out some of them! The proper tag is only part of the problem, as you have to have the right to use the image in the first place. Unfortunately, you might not be able to use the head image on Pallywood. I do not know AP's policy on usage of their images. You might be able to find more at the AP website. Perhaps an inquiry at the media copyright questions page would give you the answer. Good luck! -- Butseriouslyfolks 18:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Battle of Jenin

I would say that at the time the rumors were not baseless. If you added a sentence (and cited your source) saying These rumours were later found to be baseless by , I would not object. Park3r 18:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

are you kidding me?? a couple of crack head arabs say that maybe israel moved bodies by trucks and everybody follows up on it.. and you consider that factual?! .. sure.. maybe the Ouze Merham interview was not baseless either?? .. i bet that was extremely basefull *shrug* ... there's no way to avoid being called a liar if you keep getting caught lying. Jaakobou 21:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Jenin

You can consider it whatever you like, but here on Misplaced Pages we have rules. They include no original research, use of reliable sources, and most importantly, neutral point of view. I suggest you adhere to them and not make false accusations on other's web pages. Ramallite 14:58, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

your reply is nothing but a smoke screen to your activity on that page. Jaakobou 16:12, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Thank you.Abu ali 11:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Abu ali, i assumed you're working with good faith until i entered your user page and saw that you link to Meshe Katzav, , as your example of zionism. considering that you added the link only recently, i presume that you know exactly what you're doing and that you present no good faith in any israeli-related topic that you come near to. Jaakobou 09:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Shalom Jaakobou, Moshe Katzav is currently president of the state of Israel. (He has suspended himself, but has still not resigned). The prezident has little actual power in Israel, but acts as a figurehead and symbol of the state. In this respect, I would say he is doing a good job. He was not elected by me, but by the Knesset.

I would appreciate it if you did not edit my user page, as this is considered unacceptable behaviour on Misplaced Pages. If you wish to send me any further warnings, threats or insults, then please feel free to use my talk page instead. Abu ali 10:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Jaakobou please stop your inappropriate accusations on my talk page. If you have a problem, you are welcome to report me to the appropriate administrative pages or request comment/mediation. Okay? Then I can report how you are calling me a "vandal" and warning me to "butt out" and all this incivility and POV-pushing that you are attempting. Ramallite 13:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps my initial response was a tad uncivil, however, your off-topic irregular responses and continuous deletion of material got the deserving and proper civilized response, i do apologize for the uncivility in my first reaction, i do not appreciate my hard work erased entirely without proper cause and your "cause" did not touch the issue at all and left me feeling that vandalism was applied. Jaakobou 09:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

First, try to work with me instead of blindly reverting. OPERATION DEFENSIVE SHIELD was in response to Netanya and all of that. The JENIN thing was a PART of the operation, and not caused entirely by the operation. Second, there are other concerns in that section other than the Netanya mention, including gross original research. You haven't addressed that properly. Third, you wouldn't happen to be User MouseWarrior, would you? Ramallite 14:43, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

i thought you were the one reverting rather than working with others *scratches head*, the operation in jenin was part of the ODS and the precursors to that operation are integral to the intro.. apparently, i'm not the only one to think so (btw, no need to be paranoid). as for the "original research" claim, i think i've given enough sourcing for all of the information (which btw, is factual). lastly, if you have good sources which explain what you describe to be the palestinian view on this operation (i.e. unprovoked assault by israel), than you are free to add them to the article. however, deletion of integral material is a funny way to display your point of view (i.e. perhaps you wish to portray israel as going for needless attacks). are you by any chance from ramallah? i hear that ramallah is considered the equivalent of tel aviv in the PA controlled areas. Jaakobou 22:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I responded on the Talk:Battle of Jenin page. You have addressed none of my concerns (except with your typical "What Jaakobou says goes" attitude), and you keep reintroducing blatant original research and incorrect interpretation of sources. You also didn't answer my question: Are you User:MouseWarrior? Am I from Ramallah? No I'm from Bnei Brak. My father was a Yeke cymbal player who accidentally rode a ship to Haifa instead of Rio de Janeiro, and my mother was a non-Jewish opera tenor (yes, tenor) from Nigeria. Ramallite 05:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:AIV reporting

Copied from AIV: I'm not sure about WP ettiquette and this is more of an iquery rather than a final report. a user has used his personal page to make a bias statement linking an ideaology with an alleged criminal - when pointed out on this and given a warning, his response was to link me with that ideaology and point my username out on his page - i cave him a Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Misplaced Pages, you may be blocked from editing. notice on this obvious offense.. what is the eqttiquette on continued handling of this issue? Jaakobou 11:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, issue the user with a final warning - you can do this by adding the following template to his userpage {{test4|Page name being vandalised}} ~~~~ (note, change 'page name being vandalised' to the actual page name. If he continues to act in the manor you have described, report him on AIV (instructions can be found there but you should generally add: *{{Vandal|Username}} reason for requesting block ~~~~ - hope this helps you! RyanPostlethwaite 12:12, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Please also note, that all comments (uncluding warnings) should be added to peoples talk pages, not there userpages. Regards RyanPostlethwaite 12:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Jaakobou, You added the following warning to my talk page.

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalise Misplaced Pages, as you did to User:Abu_ali, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages.

i'm afraid you did not only refuse to remove your obvious connction of an alleged sexual offender from the "Zionism" title, but you made sure that my username stay after it was removed by an admin - your activity has shown that you have the intention of using this platform in a destructive manner even after being given fair warning - this is your third warning. Jaakobou 21:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for putting the warnings on my talk page rather than on my user page this time. Nevertheless I must say your warnings are totally inapropriate. My alledged offence in your eyes is to have a link to the prezident of the state of Israel on my user page. Adding content that you do not approve of to your own user page is not vandalism. I am not sure if you think you deserve editorial control of my user page. Regarding Moshe Katzav, If you do not like the fact that Katzav is prezident of the State of Israel, then please direct your complaints to those that elected him, not to me. Please calm down Abu ali 06:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)