| Revision as of 13:12, 7 March 2007 editBozMo (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users14,164 edits jew watch (ugh)← Previous edit |
Revision as of 02:26, 9 March 2007 edit undoHumus sapiens (talk | contribs)27,653 edits archive oldNext edit → |
| Line 30: |
Line 30: |
|
|} |
|
|} |
|
<!-- eo_hdr --> |
|
<!-- eo_hdr --> |
|
|
|
|
== My apologies == |
|
|
|
|
|
I hadn't seen that Meshulam had already put the references back in. Also please see ] and the talk page there regarding the section on 'Characteristics'. --] 12:34, 7 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Template wording == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hello |
|
|
|
|
|
You added a template so users can put on the talk page here: <br> |
|
|
I think the text needs to be replaced with a more suitable wording. Remember that this template is for the articles talk page! See my suggestion here ]. |
|
|
Thank you |
|
|
] 16:24, 7 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==RS== |
|
|
I have never been to America, so I am not familiar with American addresses. But is "Wilson Street 183, Brooklyn, NYC" really a PO Box? It seems like a very real regular street address to me. If you don't believe it, go there and knock on the door. --] 11:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
Your ] for ] from the ] has been accepted. Your re-agreement is required at the ] under ]; prompt action on your behalf would be appreciated in order to commence the mediation as soon as possible. |
|
|
|
|
|
If you have any questions about my contributions, personal mediation style or otherwise, please contact me at my ], or ] at anthony (dot) cfc (at) gmail (dot) com - all email communication is private unless stated otherwise. |
|
|
|
|
|
Cheers and regards,<br>]] <sup><nowiki>] • ]]</sup> <em style="font-size:10px;">16:57, 8 January 2007 (UTC)</em> |
|
|
|
|
|
''']''': my apologies - I posted the above message to every user in the mediation, but it appears I missed you out. |
|
|
|
|
|
== Template == |
|
|
|
|
|
I was wondering if I could copy your user template onto my userpage. ] 00:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for removing the award (I didn't know that it was an award). ] 23:35, 12 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==]== |
|
|
|
|
|
Humus sapiens, as you've warned this user before, I wonder if you or someone you know might not be willing to do something about this user, who refuses to engage in discussion but simply reverts: four in just over 24hrs on ], the last two (at least) restoring outright falsehoods to the article.] 05:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Now he's taken to wikistalking me.]] 07:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==]== |
|
|
|
|
|
Havent got an comments yet, it seems to be OK, right? ] 11:26, 12 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:thanks, should I make a similar one for WikiProject Soviet Union? ] 11:38, 12 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::ok. Shabbat shalom. ] 11:52, 12 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Reverting edits == |
|
|
|
|
|
Please don't revert my edits as though I was a vandal, as you did on ]. I'm not and I had good reason for the edit I made. Do you ever actually do anything constructive on this encyclopaedia, Humus? I've only ever encountered you mindlessly pushing a POV. In this case, including more on the criticisms about an organisation than we do about the organisation itself is a clear breach of ]. Read the section on fairness of tone. |
|
|
|
|
|
Giving the opinion of IAK's opponents is fair dealing and you'll note that I did not try to minimise that aspect of the article. Writing specific criticisms in great detail is not. Obviously, your trying to include them will only cause a war because it is so manifestly not fair dealing on this issue. I should know better, I am aware, than to appeal to any sense of fairness with those who have your agenda, but I am so appealing to you, and I hope you'll at least think about it. ] 05:21, 13 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== FYI == |
|
|
|
|
|
If you're no longer interested in discussing the Canard issue (which it seems, given that you've reverted it and aren't posting on the talk page about it), do you want to go to mediation? ] ''(])'' 14:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Help me Humus!== |
|
|
|
|
|
See: ] ] 07:17, 15 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:Umm, what was this all about? I'm terribly sorry, I was at school when I checked my messages (I'm afraid that was all I was able to do...). Hope I'm not disturbing you... Cheers! --]<sup>]•]</sup> 03:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:: The anon warned us of vandalism in ] article, I've removed it. Thanks. ←] <sup>]]</sup> 12:07, 16 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Reverting == |
|
|
|
|
|
Please do not make commentless reverts to my edits. These reverts are universally understood to be applicable only to edits made by vandals. It's particularly offensive to make them to my talkpage. I urge you to consider ], particularly the section on "User space harassment". You are perfectly welcome to remove my comments from your talkpage if you feel they are not appropriate, and you could have written to me that you felt they were a personal attack if you were genuinely hurt by them. These are the correct remedies for the thing you are accusing me of. If I continued to upset you, you could then quote the same policy at me. However, the only way in which I am upsetting you is in disagreeing with your POV pushing on an article, and reverting it. Since you are not discussing the issue on talk, and are making reverts without any meaningful edit summaries, I do not think you can consider that you are pursuing the right course. ] 07:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
One page is not wikistalking, Humus. Take care. ] 08:24, 17 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I note also this comment from the policy you cited: "This does not include checking up on an editor to fix errors or violations of Misplaced Pages policy". Given that you broke policy by making reverts without edit summaries (a breach of ], which asks us not to simply revert others or to revert good-faith edits, and to explain your reverts, I thought I would check out a couple of your other edits of the same type, to see whether you have been breaking the policy in other places. If I found that you had not been, I would withdraw the comment I made about your actions (characterising your editing style not you as a person). However, sadly, you seem to be confirming my view of you. I hope you will at least read the policy and try to reconsider your confrontational approach to editing, in particular the revertwarring and use of threats instead of discussion. ] 11:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==]== |
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, could you take a look on it? I think that ''Stalinism and antisemitism'' is better (broader) theme than Stalin's antisemitism, hence I've moved the content there. Someone seemed to diagree with me ] - ] 08:23, 17 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== stolen template from Humus Sapiens == |
|
|
|
|
|
I am working on a re-vamped user page, but before I put it up, I want to ask permission to use this: ]. I still have to add some stuff and will likely change the colors around, but this is the backbone I am going to use. (I put a thank you note/credit at the bottom). --] 20:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
"The threshold for inclusion in Misplaced Pages is verifiability, not truth. '''"Verifiable" in this context means that any reader should be able to check that material added to Misplaced Pages has already been published by a reliable source.''' Editors should provide a reliable source for material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or it may be removed." is the relevant part of ]. Please read the policy in full. You will also come across "Any edit lacking a source may be removed". You are absolutely incorrect that you do not need to source everything in the article. You do. You have to source ''everything'' in ''every'' article. All I am asking is that you do not make interpretive edits. I explain fully what my objection is on the talkpage. Humus, it simply is not constructive for you to revertwar over this article. We could be working together to make a good article but you are simply being obstructive and reverting to your POV. Please stop. Consider the discussion on talk. Think about whether you would not like the same standard applied to articles in which organisations you favour are discussed. ] 10:58, 19 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Can you please stop doing this? "See their website" is not providing a source. As I have discussed with you previously, it requires original research to read the material on their site and draw conclusions from your reading. Please do not continue to mindlessly revert this article. Try to stick to editing within the bounds of the policy. You are beginning to create a serious issue over this rather minor article. Please don't. ] 12:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
You continue to revertwar over this article, despite my discussion of this unsourced edit. I am entitled to remove it. Read the policy. Please source the edit you keep re-inserting. If you are sourcing it to IAK's website, please adhere to what IAK says and do not use your own interpretation of what that means. I have asked you now several times to stop autoreverting me contrary to policy. Please don't make the mistake of continuing to do it. ] 06:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Vandalism on the Kristalncht page == |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm new to this but it seems that there's been some nasty tampering on your Kristalnacht article. An inserted translation of Kristalnacht as "German for "awesome penis head")". Probably not the original translation. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 04:19, 20 January 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned --> |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
Good evening (] time); I am here regarding the above ] case. I have decided to raise this here rather than the case page because it is not necessary to share it with every editor. |
|
|
|
|
|
What I wanted to share is a little advice regarding ] during mediation; an editor has raised questions about your conduct, so I'd just like to pass on the message - please remain civil, as ] is not allowed and may be deleted. Please do take this constructive criticism on board, and if you have any for me I would love to hear it; otherwise, happy editing! |
|
|
|
|
|
Kind regards,<br />] <sup><nowiki>] • ]]</sup> 17:08, 20 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
Please be informed that a request for comments has been started. ] ] 21:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ZOG Mediation == |
|
|
|
|
|
{{RFM-Request|Zionist Occupation Government}} |
|
|
|
|
|
(By the way, you seem to have two talk pages; one at Humus Sapiens and one here, at Humus sapiens.) ] -- ''(]])</font>'' 19:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Dear Humus, Why don't you participate in the mediation? I think your case is strong enough that any neutral mediator would be able to see that ZOG was an anti-Semitic canard based on your ample amount of evidence. If you need support on this problem, I'm at your service. --] 20:50, 26 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Well, I suppose as long as Mr. .V. doesn't delete the category, then there's no harm done. You might be right. Maybe he's content with just ranting and raving on talk pages. --] 05:46, 27 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - January 2007 == |
|
|
The ''']''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. |
|
|
|
|
|
<small>This is an automated delivery by ] 20:42, 23 January 2007 (UTC) </small> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Hasbara Fellowships Page - Deletion Question == |
|
|
|
|
|
If I disagree with a deletion, is there a way to un-delete it? The page is question is ], part of the Aish HaTorah group of articles. --] 22:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
=={{tl|new}}== |
|
|
|
|
|
Do we have a cat somewhere for new articles like ], ] and tons of others... for wikification purposes etc. ] 16:53, 24 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==]== |
|
|
Humus! Check this "general syntagm" of Antisemitism. It's just unreferenced garbage, and belongs in the trashcan. I'm busy elsewhere. I recommend you revert: |
|
|
"(actually "Jewish Bolshevism" may be used according to English grammar |
|
|
as an adjective + a noun; I think the article should not label as myth the general syntagm, |
|
|
just the term as suggested)" |
|
|
] --] 18:49, 28 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== RFC for ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
I would like to start up an RFC regarding ]'s actions involving ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
In short, the category was: |
|
|
|
|
|
*CfD'd on 6 December 2006 and deleted on 14 December 2006 |
|
|
* DRV'd on the same day with consensus to keep reached on 20 December 2006 |
|
|
* Recreated on 10 January 2006 |
|
|
* CfD'd again that same day with consensus to delete reached on 17 January 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
This was brought to my attention by a ] in potential violation of ], though I do find ]'s actions quite disturbing and unbecoming of an admin. Would you be willing to make a statement if an RFC is posted? ] (] | ]) 18:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:] ] (] | ]) 16:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Humus, you've just added demonstrably false material to ]. I'm pretty sure you've done this blindly, believing that I had reverted your previous edit, whereas in fact my second edit was unrelated. Please do read first and edit after, avoid blind reverts, and participate on the talk page before removing material. Thanks.--] 06:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Zionism == |
|
|
I am being insulted by you. What is the point to first remove my added references and then calling them 'nonsense'? Anything which is related to Zionism that will come under the topic ]. Those Jews referenced have their organizations negating the cause of ] even being Jews themselves. What is the point to call that nonsese? Either you are a ] that you dont like those Jews who are against Zionism or their is some other problem with you. ] 09:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] Coordinator Elections == |
|
|
|
|
|
The ] selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please ] by February 11! |
|
|
|
|
|
<small>Delivered by ] 10:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)</small> |
|
|
|
|
|
==Orphaned fair use image (Image:1999albumcover Kamburova Kapli Datskogo Korolya.jpg)== |
|
|
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see ]). |
|
|
|
|
|
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described on ]. Thank you. This is an automated message from ] 05:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Orphaned fair use image (Image:Golda working in kibbutz Merhavia2.jpg)== |
|
|
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see ]). |
|
|
|
|
|
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described on ]. Thank you. This is an automated message from ] 21:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Orphaned fair use image (Image:Poster Golda Meyerson fundraising.jpg)== |
|
|
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see ]). |
|
|
|
|
|
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described on ]. Thank you. This is an automated message from ] 01:53, 3 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== DYK == |
|
|
|
|
|
{| class="messagebox {{#ifeq:{{{small|}}}|yes|small|standard}}-talk" |
|
|
|- |
|
|
|] |
|
|
|On ], ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the ]. |
|
|
|} <!-- ], ] -->--]] 11:21, 5 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Unspecified source for Image:Havlagah bus in Palestine during Great Arab revolt.jpg== |
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged. |
|
|
|
|
|
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{tl|GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the ]. If you believe the media meets the criteria at ], use a tag such as {{tlp|fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at ]. See ] for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. |
|
|
|
|
|
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following . '''Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged''', as described on ]. If the image is copyrighted under a ] (per ]) then '''the image will be deleted ] after 11:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)'''. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you. ] 11:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Your political activism == |
|
|
|
|
|
WP is not a proper place for political activism. Please review ]. ←] <sup>]]</sup> 12:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: What exactly are you refering to? I usually stay out of political articles where I have a strong opinion. // ] |
|
|
|
|
|
:: :-D ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 13:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can == |
|
|
|
|
|
<div class="messagebox cleanup metadata plainlinks"> |
|
|
{| style="width:100%;background:none" |
|
|
| bgcolor="#ffdead" width=60|] |
|
|
| bgcolor="#ffdead" |'''The article ], to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring ].'''<br /> |
|
|
If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Misplaced Pages's ]. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the ]'s talk page.<br /> |
|
|
<small>If you do not want to receive bot-generated messages on your talk page, please consider using the ] on your user talk page</small> |
|
|
|}</div> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Star of David Page == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There was some vandalism on the Star of David page that I reverted back to what I thought was a clean version. I didn't realize that the version I had reverted to also featured minor vandalism... My apologies for the confusion. |
|
|
|
|
|
] 20:48, 6 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
P.S. I'm sorry also for the grey box -- I have no idea why Wiki does this! |
|
|
Thank you, I now know. |
|
|
|
|
|
== Verifying the references == |
|
|
|
|
|
Salam |
|
|
|
|
|
Could you please help us in ]?--] 15:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Clinton reviews PA books == |
|
|
|
|
|
Are you still interested in expanding the ] article? This (PDF) was reviewed by ]. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 05:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned --> |
|
|
|
|
|
:Also, this needs to go somewhere: --] 05:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
Hi Humus sapiens, |
|
|
|
|
|
Thought this might be interesting: |
|
|
. |
|
|
|
|
|
It is written by Professor ], William R. Kenan, Jr., Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies and Director of the Carolina Center for the Study of the Middle East and Muslim Civilizations |
|
|
University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. |
|
|
|
|
|
Cheers, |
|
|
--] 23:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== No Block? == |
|
|
|
|
|
I guess I am not sure you you arrived at the fact that there was no 3RR violation by , especially when the violations appeared to be quite clear. Perhaps I could trouble you to explain how two different sets of at least four reverts each doesn't constitute a violation. I am trying to understand the policy, which seemed to me to have been clearly violated.] 13:07, 11 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for your comments on my submitted 3RR report. However, a closer look would have revealed that the prior instances of 3RR I pointed out in my report of Viriditas were done so to show a pattern of reverts. As well, the reverts were not "ancient" history, as they took place less three days prior to the 3RR I was reporting. These prior instances were not submitte4d as a 3RR violation, quite simply because I was relatively unfamiliar with the violation policy. |
|
|
I am really, ''really'' not trying to be difficult, or vindictive here; I think the policy should apply equally to everyone, and I presented an instance where an ''editor'' (who should know better) broke the 3RR twice in as many days, and yet it appeared that reports both before and after it (dealing with non-editors) were officiated both before and after my report. In fact, my report was archived without result, and I had to resubmit it again. I was not led to the impression that anyone aside from SlimVirgin actually looked at the instances, seeming to base their conclusions solely upon her notations (prior to my subsequently supplied pattern of violations). |
|
|
It didn't seem fair that someone who should know better should be given a pass on a 3RR violation without even a warning simply because they are an editor. Because the violations appeared to be rather clear to me (and the offender seemed rather devious in hiding them under different edit summaries), it seemed that the 3RR policy wasn't applied fairly. That he violated the 3RR twice wohtout so much as a warning lent a bit of credence to what seems pretty unequal treatment. |
|
|
If I could trouble you to look again at the instances I provided, both the initial ones listed in the complaint, as well as those listed as examples of pattern, I would appreciate it. If however you have done so, please pardon my unintended slight. Perhaps I am not interpreting the reverts correctly.] 22:20, 11 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==]== |
|
|
|
|
|
Nice job on an article of great historical importance! --]<sup><small>( ] | ])</small></sup> 00:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== HeavensGateTrekker? == |
|
|
|
|
|
Good grief, man, you've got nothing better to do than to take juvenile swipes at my nick? Try addressing the relevant points of discussion. Your antics just demean you. If you think Christ==Heaven's Gate, fine, but ]. Ironic that you link it here, yourself. ⇔ ] 18:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Your warning == |
|
|
|
|
|
Please review your actions. Blind reverts are reserved for vandalism. Consider this a friendly warning. ←] <sup>]]</sup> 03:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:*It was '''not''' a blind revert. I checked the talk page first before I reverted to see if you '''discussed''' your edits before making them. It wasn't until '''after''' you made the edits that you mentioned it on the talk page. Please keep your friendly warnings and reserve them for vandals. I am doing my part here on WP to the best of my ability but it irks me when I see users remove content from an article that they disagree with without discussing first. Thank you. ] 03:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::*I did read your '''edit summary''' and I still think you should have discussed it on the talk page first which is why I reverted you. Again, I would like to direct you to ] and refrain from telling me to "keep what irks me to myself." If you did not agree with my revert, that is why there is a discussion page for each article, my own talk page and my email is always open. Again, please remember to assume good faith. Thank you. ] 03:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: ''the other half of this conversation: , '' |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
Please read ] and follow it. // ] |
|
|
|
|
|
* Please do not insert unsourced opinions into biographies. We can say that his work has been criticized as "antilocution" if we have a ] which has made such criticisms. We absolutely cannot say as a fact that his works are "antilocution cartoons." Simple as that. ] 19:57, 14 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== WikiProject Military History elections == |
|
|
|
|
|
The ] election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please ] by February 25! |
|
|
|
|
|
<small>Delivered by ] 14:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)</small> |
|
|
|
|
|
==Response== |
|
|
I have responded to your word of thanks. My answer can be found ]. --] (] ]) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
I need help on this one; please see the article's history. ] ] 07:29, 16 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:Isn't "vote stacking" against the rules? OH WELL: let the swarming begin... --] 08:10, 16 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==History of the Jews in Spain== |
|
|
Hi, I can help you with adding references in the text of ]. Is it a good suggestion.--] 13:21, 16 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== policy and blogs == |
|
|
Hi, I noticed you removed an external link adding the comment that it was a blog... I was just wondering what the policy is on this? In this particilar case it was a specialised blog focusing exactly on the topic which it was linked to from. It was also a blog by someone with inside knowledge etc, so a good source of primary information. |
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see how the fact that something is published usign a blog rather than as html invalidates the content... if so say that is hwo it is, then fair enough... but I'm confused and any light that can be shed ont he matter would be welcome. |
|
|
|
|
|
NB: This is a general enquiry on the policy not a discussion on that specific link |
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks ] 15:48, 16 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your reply, my problem is that I think I have what you'd call an exception. Without going into details, I know the bloggers identity and know them to be an expert and to be writing based on information not always in the public domain (though they do usually comment on things that are in the public domain but might be in obscure places). Their identity however is not publically known (and can not be for various reasons). Given my website hosts them, I don't think I'm in a position to restore the link. Ah well, maybe someone will put it back some time in the future. You removed it as part of a larger clean up job after it had been there without complaint for quite some time. |
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you anyway for your reply and explanation - ] 20:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Question re Project Israel == |
|
|
|
|
|
] ] 19:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
I thought you might be interested in it. ] ] 12:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:Isn't 'vote stacking' prohibited on Misplaced Pages? Someone told me that it was before, a certain admin. if I remember correctly. --] 02:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Extremist == |
|
|
|
|
|
I would really like to know why you would call me an extremist? I assume you have read all the evidence, and you would probably know I have never flamed, or cursed anyone, whereas Bakasuprman has been making extremely offensive and racist remarks. It is your right to oppose any blocks on him, but why label me an extremist? Looking forward to your explanation.<br /> |
|
|
--<b><font color="green">]</font></b><b><font color="black" size="4">]</font></b> <sup><font color="green">]</font></sup> 13:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Help needed with Joseph Carlebach article. == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Humus: Please see ] about the Rabbi Dr. ] article where I have been contacted by a researcher from the German Wiki with lots of genuine and historical material about Rabbi Dr. Joseph Carlebach, the last Chief Rabbi of Hamburg Altona who was killed by the Nazis with his flock during the Holocaust. Rabbi Joseph Carlebach was probably one of the top rabbis in Germany prior to the Holocaust and was held in high regard by famous rabbinical peers in Europe. Developing this article would be a great thing. Please help. Thank you. ] 08:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
<div style="border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#ffcc00;background:#FFFDDF;"> |
|
|
<div style="text-align:center;"><div style="font-family:Garamond,Georgia,Serif;">]<big>'''The Original Barnstar'''</big><br>For your ] in the ] case, ], and for helping to solve an important dispute efficiently and sucessfully - and making my Mediation easier <tt>:)</tt> - I, ], award ''']''' the Original ]. Well done!<br> |
|
|
''Kind regards'',<br>] <sup><nowiki>] • ]]</sup></div></div> |
|
|
</div> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Hi there == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How are you doing? |
|
|
About the Israeli passport thingie... |
|
|
1. As for no biometric passports to date, I aksed this question a week-ago when I renewed my own passport at the ministry office. |
|
|
I guess they know what they're talking about. |
|
|
2. A simple check of the Israeli passports in issue nowadays would reveal a far lower standard than typical, when it becomes to passport-fraud protection. |
|
|
Whether it's a cheaper printing mathod for the main cover (I don't know its formal naming in English, but I do in Hebrew), a non-alternating sheet pattern (as common in many new passports), or no real guidelines on what the picture should look like, its size and etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
All in all, a quick check you can probably perform on your own would reveal it. :) |
|
|
|
|
|
Cheers. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 15:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned --> |
|
|
|
|
|
== The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007 == |
|
|
|
|
|
The ''']''' of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. |
|
|
|
|
|
<small>Delivered by ] 15:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC) </small> |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
Is there a reason you blocked this IP indefinitely? It only has 4 contributions, and worse, it's a shared IP. ] 19:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Help with ] article please? == |
|
|
|
|
|
I thought your joke on the controversies page was very amusing. Would you consider intervening with the whole Libby Jew thing? ] is starting to get nasty. Lately been falsely accusing me of using multiple accounts and harrassment. Also insists on inserting original research and unreliable sources. I can handle myself, but I'm probably boring the heck out of everyone. If you think I'm wrong or out of line, please let me know that too. Thanks! ] 19:39, 3 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Antisemitism == |
|
|
H.S. I don't know why we can not understand each other. My understanding of the term: Anti-Semitism = Anti + Semitism is to be Anti - Jew, i.e. To hate and persecute Jews for being a Jew (religously or ethinicly). Now, I think the Qur'an is clearly anti-pagan but not anti-Jew. The Qur'an asks Muslims to oppose pagans simply because they are pagan. Exactly ''because'' of their theological view; because of their religion. To me that's clear. But when we turn to Judaism, the story is completely different. The Qur'an states that among the Jews there are some who are on the right path and some who are not. Some go to heaven, some don't(please see {{Quran-usc|2|62}}, {{Quran-usc|3|33}}, and this one about Torah {{Quran-usc|5|44}}). But I agree that there are polemical verses in the Qur'an and I am certainly aware that many Muslims abuse these verses. But please note that one would expect some criticisms from a new religion towards the older one; a new scientific theory criticizes previous ones; that's natural to me. Probably Bahaism does the same to Islam. Also, please note that scholars like Goitein, Lazarus-Yafeh have suggested that the Qur’anic positions often reflect disputes between Jewish groups. These sort of debates, while nasty, are not something very extraordinary. I am really tired of these articles. I wish we could throw ''all'' controversial articles out of wikipedia. --] 10:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: ''The other half: .'' ←] <sup>]]</sup> 22:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== AfD == |
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed you were involved in discussion. ]. --] 18:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Recent edit to ] == |
|
|
Hi Humus sapiens! an edit was made to ] adding the following paragraph: |
|
|
|
|
|
:Recently in the JOFA 10th Anniversary International Conference on Feminism & Orthodoxy, three members of these minyanim (Elitzur Bar-Asher, Michal Bar-Asher Siegal and Alanna Copper), in a session under the title: "Beyond Women Issue: Partnership Minyanim Engages Orthodoxy," articulated for the first time the methodology of the halachic decision process and the ideology behind these minyanim. <nowiki><ref>,''The Jewish State''</ref></nowiki> |
|
|
|
|
|
I don't have any problem with the reliability of the media source, which contains excerpts from the JOFA paper which could be legitimately added to the article. The paper itself, if it were published, could be cited and its content excerpted. But it doesn't seem to me that the mere presentation of an unpublished paper in a conference -- with nothing about the content, just the presentation of a paper and a claim the paper is a first -- is appropriate encyclopedia content for this article. (I'm also skeptical of the claim of first publication. For example, ] wrote about these topics in her 2004 book ''Expanding the Palace of Torah'', although doubtless not in as much detail). I want to be helpful to these people and if they have value to add and can reliably source it, I want to them to get their content in and they're welcome to cite any acceptable publication. However, I feel that simply adding a paragraph about the existence and virtues of an unpublished paper without meaningfully describing what it says on the article topic is not appropriate encyclopedia content and is possibly ]. I'd appreciate a second opinion on this issue as well as your input about how to proceed. Best, --] 19:09, 6 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Pretty Shocking == |
|
|
I had a look at the ] website. Actually it is pretty shocking and a much better argument for taking ] seriously than the ] article. Do things like that exist outside the USA too? Yuck. --] ] 13:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
