Misplaced Pages

User talk:Yuber: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:28, 9 May 2005 editYuber (talk | contribs)4,476 edits []← Previous edit Revision as of 01:02, 9 May 2005 edit undoKaintheScion (talk | contribs)120 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 126: Line 126:


:::I actually didn't stalk your contrib page, but two of your edits came up on my watchlist. When I went to leave you a message, I saw that your talk page was cleared. So I reverted to the last version (and there is no rule against this).]<sup><small><font color="#FF8C00">]</font></small></sup> 00:28, 9 May 2005 (UTC) :::I actually didn't stalk your contrib page, but two of your edits came up on my watchlist. When I went to leave you a message, I saw that your talk page was cleared. So I reverted to the last version (and there is no rule against this).]<sup><small><font color="#FF8C00">]</font></small></sup> 00:28, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

==YOU POV PUSHING REVERT MONKEY==
Stop reverting things when you could make edits, you stupid POV-pushing revert monkey.]

Revision as of 01:02, 9 May 2005

Hello and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

Good luck!

Meelar (talk) 08:07, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)


Hi Yuber. I think you may be being just a little too bold in adding Category:Arab history to the pages of the Arab countries. There is already a Category:History of the Middle East which links specifically historical articles about Arabs and others in the region.--Pharos 05:40, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

True, i guess with the Arab League category it is kind of redundant.--Yuber
Then do you mind if I delete this category?--Pharos 04:15, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
No problemYuber 04:17, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi! Good to see someone editing more Arab-related topics. Have you checked out ar: yet? - Mustafaa 03:48, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hey, although i speak arabic fluently, i'm not that good at writing or reading. I mean , i know how to work out words phonetically and i know all the letters but i am not proficient enough for something like an encyclopedia :(. Anyways, thanks for your encouragement, i'll continue editing arab-related topic here on the english site :).Yuber 03:58, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I think you have a problem with the article I created called Islamic fascism. If you do perhaps you could discuss it with me. Walkingeagles 06:07, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Discussion forum for Souria.com

Hello Yuber. You mentioned in talk:Syria that their is a heated discussion in the English forums of Souria.com. I tried to find the link, but couldn't. Do you happen to know the address for this exact link? Regards, --Gramaic 02:36, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hey, here is the link to the discussion forums in English

http://www.souria.com/club/sb_forum.asp?forumid=3

Many of the topics got deleted, they were posted by Lebanese people trying to stir up trouble. Register if you want, we need more people on the forum :).Yuber 02:40, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Yuber, I really appreciate it.--Gramaic 03:37, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

False flag revisions

It's debatable whether Irgun was a terrorist organization; I might even be convinced that it was. But the next time you make a change like that and flag it as "minor," I'll report you for vandalism. --Leifern 14:04, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

Categorization is almost always flagged a minor edit, and I think the Deir Yassin massacre proves they were a terrorist organization. The Zionist Terror Organizations category was finally made after a long debate, it's time to start putting it to use in a fair way.Yuber 15:07, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Yuber, this is not the point. The point is that you've made multiple edits, flagged as minor with no description, which actually impact serious issues. I can only conclude that you're doing this to sneak around. Do it again, and I'll be the first to support Leifern's charge of vandalism. Mikeage 23:25, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
Once again, I am fairly new to this and I didn't know that a categorization of a group regarded terrorist by almost everyone is not a minor edit.Yuber 04:40, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
Yuber, I think you're much smarter than that. I could argue that "almost anyone" thinks that Yasser Arafat was a corrupt, degenerate imposter, but that doesn't give me the right to flag such a categorization (if it existed) as "minor." --Leifern 13:36, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

Islamofascism

Hello. You always keep on asking on the Islamist Terroism page on why this word has anything to do with Islamist Terrorism. I wish for you to read this posting that I wrote on the talk page: "Islamofacism The word has been used in the article before, not as a direct reference to Islamist Terrorism, but as an article of interest of those who want to read up on the entire issues of terrorism. What happened this morning is that a user by the name of Spastika took the word out, called it a POV. I reverted it, since nearly everything he did was reverted because of his possible pro-Arab pov pushing. I am not sure when the word was added to the article, but all I wanted to do is bring it back to a previous version. Zscout370 (talk) 23:13, 4 May 2005 (UTC)"

Basically, all the link there was place there is just for those who are reading the article on Islamist Terrorism might be interested in the debate about Islamofacism. I agree with people that it is a word recently made up and made popular by "right wing nuts" like Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh, but I believe it is a valid link to be put at the end of the article. Plus, as I mentioned before, I was reverting vandalism by a user who was vandalising many pages. Zscout370 (talk) 23:31, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Oh ok, that's fine.Yuber 04:39, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
Plus, I know the word is a slur and made up, but I was wondering if you, myself and others can agree to add the link to the article page. Dispite of what I told you and what I said on the talk page, it feels like I might have started an edit war over that word. What can we do to stop this editing war? Zscout370 (talk) 13:44, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Another question: do you think the comments by User:KaintheScion seen to be odd? Though this person has an account since (probably) this weekend, it feels like this person has been here before. The person's first comments were to defame (or attack, depending if the accusations are true or not) User:GraceNote. I do not know if this is getting bad, but if it does, I can have you talk to a few folks. Zscout370 (talk) 16:41, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

It doesn't seem that bad so far, just strange... For a user that just registered yesterday to have all the knowledge of the events of the past few weeks is fishy. He claims he's just a "lurker" that decided to register and get in on things. I don't think anything needs to be done now as he just is trying to argue his POV in the talk page.Yuber 17:02, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
I agree, it is strange. I still think it will be valid to at least mention when the term was coined, the person who coined it, where it was first used, where it is used now and the objections of Muslims. If an article about Judeofascism comes up, I will have no problems with it. Zscout370 (talk) 17:09, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Syria Ribbon

Question, I am wondering why you put that on your user page. I have no problems with it, but I just want to know why you did it. Zscout370 (talk) 18:40, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Just to make my bland user page a bit more aesthetic.Yuber 21:04, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Re ChantingFox's reversions

As I gather from his talk page, ChantingFox is fairly new to Misplaced Pages, and was immediately praised for his work in reverting articles that had been vandalized. He's decided that what you and I see as vandalism is a serious edit and that you and I are the vandals, so he's determined to revert. I've left messages on his talk page. I dunno if I got through to him. Zora 20:58, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Nope, I was wrong. There's another message from ChantingFox on the vandalism alert page, saying that someone is spoofing him, and asking to have this IP blocked. So my initial guess (recorded on his userpage) that there was some skullduggery going on, was proved right after all. Zora 21:01, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
I had a feeling something was strange when his contributions section showed that he only created his account today and already acquired a barnstar after editing a few Islamic related articles..Yuber 21:04, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
From checking the Page History, ChantingFox himself redirected Yuber's user page to douche, then switched it back. I do agree that there have been people who have been impersonating users on Misplaced Pages, but this edit was not by an imposter. Zscout370 (talk) 21:06, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Please note the difference between my username and his. This user copied my userpage AND talkpage completely, and redirected my userpage to the same one. --Chanting Fox 21:08, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Oh man, please accept my apologizes about that one Chanting. I realized now the same vandal has done the same thing to ClockworkSoul, copying the user page and all. If his IP was blocked, then the vandal must have been using a proxy, which is hard to block. However, a notice on Long Term Alerts on the Vandalism in Progress page should be warrented, since this vandal is causing many problems. Zscout370 (talk) 21:14, 6 May 2005 (UTC)


Jizyah

Very nice work on this -- and no small amount of diplomatic skill, I notice.

I have made some minor style edits, hope they are helpful, let me know what you think. BrandonYusufToropov 03:03, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Klonimus and Jayjg were going off interpretations by Ibn Warraq and Bat Ye'or. After their changes, the article basically read like one of those two's books. Thanks for your edits, but Klonimus and Jayjg will probably be back trying to push POVs again.Yuber 03:09, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
I think I recall reading somewhere that there was a community that petitioned the Caliph (or somebody) for the right to pay jizyah -- they wanted protection, in other words. Of course, I don't have the source now. Ring any bells? BrandonYusufToropov 14:59, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
I think it's already in the article, the Christian Arabs that wanted to pay twice the amount of jizyah to express their gratitude. It might have to be made clearer. It seems that Klonimus and Jayjg's editing style is to remove all quotes and examples that might shed a positive light on the actual history to the bottom and put the interpretations from Ibn Warraq and Bat Ye'or to the top.Yuber 22:30, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Saudi Arabia

Is there any reason to delete the text in Saudi Arabia, for example I don't find this paragraph POV:

"Highlights of mutaween activities in the news include instances where they prevented women from leaving burning buildings because they did not have proper Islamic headgear on, and numerous instances of religious persecution of non-Muslims for the "crime" of not being Muslim in Saudi Arabia."


since all of it is based on facts. -- Eagle 16:36, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

I hate the mutaween just as much as you do (have family living near dammam), but that paragraph was highly pov. For example, it claimed that the mutaween were found in most muslim countries (the only ones I can think of are Saudi and Iran). It also claimed that the burning building incident was a "highlight", a highlight is usually a good thing. If that paragraph was re-written in more NPOV language, I would see it as useful to the article.Yuber 16:50, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
Thanks, now it's clear. Though I still believe it would be better if it was rewritten instead of having it deleted. -- Eagle 16:50, May 8, 2005 (UTC)

Vandalizing user pages

Vandalizing the user page of an admin will get you blocked. If you do it again, I will block you. RDsmith4 00:19, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Who are you trying to kid? It's obvious you are an impersonator.Yuber 00:20, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Impersonation

Thanks! Any idea whose sockpuppet it might have been? User:Rdsmith4/Sig 01:15, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Go for the latest info on the "impersonator vandal" aka the "doppelganger" Yuber 01:40, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

User:KaintheScion

This user has been engaging in POV-pushing on several articles, and upon overviewing his contributions I've noticed that he has also engaged in personal insults against you on several occasions. If you want to file a WP:RFC against him, I would be willing to co-sign it. Firebug 00:22, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Yuber, KaintheScion is entitled to remove messages from his own talk page. Please don't revert him again. Many thanks, SlimVirgin 00:23, May 9, 2005 (UTC)
Yuber, you're the POV pusher, and stalking my contrib page to revert me is getting really old. Knock it off.KaintheScion
I actually didn't stalk your contrib page, but two of your edits came up on my watchlist. When I went to leave you a message, I saw that your talk page was cleared. So I reverted to the last version (and there is no rule against this).Yuber 00:28, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

YOU POV PUSHING REVERT MONKEY

Stop reverting things when you could make edits, you stupid POV-pushing revert monkey.KaintheScion