User talk:Kendrick7 - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tewfik (talk | contribs) at 07:27, 19 September 2006 (→Lead to Israel-Lebanon conflict: sp & Talk). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 07:27, 19 September 2006 by Tewfik (talk | contribs) (→Lead to Israel-Lebanon conflict: sp & Talk)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Please leave a new message.

Andrew Jackson Zilker

Wow, Andrew Jackson Zilker is a heck of a way to make an entrance! Well done. Melchoir 10:11, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Come to think of it, what is your reference? Melchoir 10:15, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, it's late night for me too. Well, I'll add one of the milder tags to the article asking for sources. No offense, of course! Melchoir 10:45, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Sure, it would be great if you could include those sources. In fact, citing an unreliable source is better than than using it without mention. Ultimately, the perfect Misplaced Pages article would list and refute the most popular myths about Zilker, if any are found; but whether myth or fact, for now it's enough to know where the info comes from. Melchoir 11:19, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Apartheid

Please stop changing the articles on apartheid. This is a very contentious issue, and is currently being discussed at Misplaced Pages:Central_discussions/Apartheid. In the meantime, both apartheid articles are being kept stable until such time as a resolution is reached. Thank you. — Imp i 23:08, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Your Ad Here

Local regression

Thanks for doing the merge. Btyner 02:30, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

SLBN vs. BUV

Sorry about that, I never thought about the IATA code. I work at an airport and we only use the ICAO. Anyway here's what I found. If you go to here and enter BUV into the IATA box it brings up Bella Union, Uruguay. This also shows BUV as Bella Union, Uruguay. Next I tried google with Bolivia and Uruguay. Another releiable source is Falling Rain and all I found there was the town of Bella Union, Uruguay. Most seem to say that BUV is in Uruguay but I can't find the government listing of airports in that country. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 07:02, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Two different people. The first a potato chip salesman going to Cambridge, Ontario and came here. The second going to Victoria, British Columbia and got sent to Victoria Island. There are IATA codes for towns, railways and airports and there are also duplicates in different countries. The ICAO is better because you can identify the country by the first or first two letters and there are no duplicates worldwide. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 17:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Environmental effects - Lebanon

Thanks for your comment. I was referring to size mainly in terms of bytes - while 30kb is no longer an issue, WP:SIZE states that we should try to keep the article as close to 50kb as possible - and it's currently 70kb. Photos aren't actually included in the size of articles, I beleive, only the text and formatting. Hence why size as in brevity is important too - all of the sections, I think, have their own sub articles now, so the only thing that should remain is the summary. Sorry if I deleted info that isn't in the parent article - I assumed the comparison with the Exxon Valdez was already in there, but I didn't check, and I should have. I've no dislike of that particular comment; as you say, it provides a scale with which people can measure the spill, but just in general, that section needs to be shorter. Since there is no sub article for the fires or the depleted uranium, I left those sections in, even though they aren't nearly as important in the oil spill. Anyway, I've explained what I'm trying to do - you've done a great job on that section, so I'll leave it up to you what to do with it. Iorek85 06:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

You're absolutely right. My mistake - I missed the "readable prose" criteria. I thought the kb list at the middle of the article referred to the total size (excluding pictures), not the readable prose. However, reading some of the discussions (on the size talkpge), length is still somewhat of an issue - History of Russia (I believe the longest featured article we have) is 78kb, only a few more than the Lebanon article. Most of that is text, however, but you can understand a vast topic such as that requiring such a size, but I don't think it can be justified for a one month long conflict. (the 1982 Lebanon War doesn't even register, while World War II is 108kb, and the Vietnam War is 128). However, as you rightly point out, the readable prose isn't a concern - I think the references are the main problem. As for speeds, remember uploads; down here in backwardsland cable and ADSL have a 128kb/256kb upload, and only 2 out of the 8 million or so houses have at least that. Uploading a 78kB article edit will take 5 seconds, and somewhere in the region of 20 on dialup. Sure, its not a big thing, but it can be annoying.

And you've nothing to apologise for. Iorek85 08:01, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Historical Background in 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict

Could you please stop adding the section on the May 2006 ceasefire, and calling it "reverting vandalism"? I have moved (note, not deleted) it into the historical background section where it flows better. The ceasefire itself is not worthy of a larger section; I feel its mention in the historical background is enough. If you disagree, it'd be good if we could take it up on the talkpage. Thanks. Iorek85 23:57, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Harvard Extension

I got your message on Harvard Extension. It's most unfortunate that that is the case. I think Harvard may be doing a disservice to younger students who get into this program which apparently, consistent with extension programs at most universities, was designed for older superannuated students with special needs not planning on entering the career rat race in the first instance (agricultural classes for local farmers etc. is the classic example from "land grant" universities). In fact previously, the NYT article noted, those of presumptive undergraduate age were specifically barred from the program. Thus I felt the young lady featured in the NYT article who turned down admission at Hopkins to go to Harvard Extension may feel in later years that she made a big mistake, of course she could transfer. The point being why be a second class citizen anywhere or as Caesar supposedly commented in response to a query from an aide while traveling through a small village in the Alps during his march on Rome, he would rather be village chief in that small place than second fiddle in Rome any day. It is good, however, that Harvard is seeking to broaden its role of community service.Tom Cod 17:35, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: WP:BUNCH

Actually, it's pretty common knowledge among people who work with infoboxes. The issue is a known bug with CSS rendering (and only shows up on some browsers, to boot); I don't think there's ever been a Misplaced Pages-wide consensus on whether we should move templates around (potentially causing gaps to appear on larger screens) or just wait for the bug to be fixed.

The other obvious fix, incidentally—and the reason why this issue doesn't come up so much in practice—is to simply make the lead longer. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 22:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

In any case, I've added a note to the relevant template instructions. Kirill Lokshin 22:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

1982 Lebanon War

Southern Lebanon and Israeli Security Zone are two different things; please look them up. For most of the post-invasion period, Hezbollah controlled much of Southern Lebanon, excluding the Israeli Security Zone, which was controlled by Israel until 2000. (I added the SLA, but it would be difficult to say that they "controlled" the area given their dependence on Israel.) I'm not sure why you keep insisting that Israel controlled southern Lebanon, but, after 1985, it did not. Calbaer 00:37, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Israel-Lebanon conflict

Good work on the lead, it is better. I still think "relations" is the more appropriate title, but I want to wait and see what other editors have to say about it. Definitely we shouldn't merge into Arab-Israeli conflict.Sanguinalis 00:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

2006 Israel Lebanon conflict Catholics and Maronites

Hello Kendrick, I'm sorry if this sounds rude but you are mistaken about "most Christians in Lebanon are/were Cathloic", although most christians in Lebanon are not Maronites today, they were certainly the majority of christians when lebanon became independent. I think you might be confused due to the fact that today the Maronite church is in full communion with the Catholic church, so they are technically unified. However, to actually refer to Maronites as Catholic really is misleading since they actually have entirely different histories. In fact, the Maronite church is more similar to the eastern rite churches than to the Catholic church. Although this is not my area of expertise (in fact I am not even christian) I do however happen to know quite a bit on this subject. I will be changing the passage back in the article, if you would like to discuss it more please leave me a message on my talk page.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 11:57, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Ninjas can beat pirates any day of the week!

What do you mean by lumping them in with protestants?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 12:07, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I never really understood why people tend to consider "Christian" as a reference to "protestant" as opposed to "Catholic", but I really wouldn't have any problem with refering to them as Maronite Catholic as long as part of the name does not link to Roman Catholic. I understand that technically they are considered part of the same church as the Roman Catholics, but still they are more of an eastern church that actually has more in common with the eastern orthodox than with western churches (least of all the protestants), the fact that they agreed to be in full communion with Rome is really quite unique but it doesn't change how different their traditions are. I figured that all of this is quite a tangent from the actual intention of your edits to that article, so I apoligize.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 12:31, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Shabtai Shavit quote

Considering that the whole Hersh claim is roundly denied by both sides, that quotation seems grossly out of context. Also, I'm not sure why you reverted my changes to the intro, as I merely copied the changes, at least some of which you seem to have agreed to, on the identical section at 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict. Let me know... Tewfik 16:07, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Lead to Israel-Lebanon conflict

Woops then - I'll have another go

. I just meant to include the changes that you (and subsequently I) made to the paragraph at the main article. Let me know what you think. Tewfik 16:23, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I think we agree then? Again, my edit/suggestion was that we be more specific, and thus not give an opportunity for the types of issues you mentioned to gain hold. Tewfik 16:59, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I must disagree - the 1948 founding of Israel and the 1967 war are only indirectly relevant. The Lebanese Civil War article makes it clear that the precipitating factor is the expulsion from Jordan of Palestinians, especially of the PLO. Including the references to the wars will only cloud the issues and make it easier for people to come away with the ideas you mentioned as wanting to avoid. Tewfik 18:29, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand you. If you agree that the indirectly responsible details shouldn't be included, then why talk about the founding of Israel? All I am saying is that because the Lebanese Civil war was not directly caused by the founding of Israel, or the 1967 war, those details should not be included, but rather only the direct cause - the Black September (as in my earlier edit). The avoiding I was referring to was your "immediate implication" comment on my Talk. Let me know, Tewfik 19:20, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't dispute that those may be factors, but they are not the direct cause. Again, the article about the Civil War points to the Black September as the immediate cause, whatever the factors that may have led up to Black September. Tewfik 20:33, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

The LNM's calls don't really prove anything one way or another, as there was internal discord and a demographic question since Lebanon's founding. The Civil War article stresses in three separate places that the post Black September events were key, despite the 1969 Cairo agreement being the PLO's formal beachhead. Again, the events of 1948 and 1967 may certainly have provided a backdrop for the Black September, but the most direct cause of destabilisation vis-a-vis the Palestinians is the post Black September expulsion. I'm really not sure why you feel we must document all of the steps leading up to the Black September, as it seems that those details both reduce clarity and open the door to nonneutrality. Let me know, Tewfik 21:40, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I assure you the feeling is mutual

. I'm not saying that Black September is the cause of the Civil War. I am saying that when you analyse the factors leading up to the events, the Black September results were far more directly tied to the Civil War than the 1948 or 1967 wars. Did those two wars play a role? Yes, but in a far more indirect manner. There were some Palestinians in Lebanon before Black September, and there was even the Cairo agreement in 1969, but the instability was far more affected by the post Black September arrival of far more Palestinians, and a whole lot of PLO. Listing the '48 & '67 wars alongside it both cloud the issue, as even the WP article on the Civil War makes it clear that the Black September (3 times) was a turning point, while it makes almost no reference to the previous two wars. Based on your comments it doesn't seem like you dispute that the two wars are far less important than the Black September in this context, which is why I am puzzled by your insistence that they all be mentioned. I suppose I have probably just misunderstood you - of course if you do believe that the two wars are just as directly tied to the Civil war as the Jordanian expulsion, I would be interested to see why, because that is not apparent to me... Tewfik 22:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think the demographic data is really very relevant, though I'll take a look later. All I am pointing out is that whatever the results of '48 and '67, they were only indirectly factors in the Civil war, while Black September is a direct catalyst. I'm not discounting that they are part of the chain of events, but they are not regarded with anywhere near the same importance as the expulsion in the later instability. Tewfik 23:33, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate your effort to compromise by only discussing '48, but I still don't think that that is supported by what happened. I'm not sure on what basis you argue that the events of '48 were directly relevant. Please clarify, as the current formulation, as neutral as it may be, seems misleading. Tewfik 18:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I am replying on the Talk:2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict. Tewfik 07:27, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Afghan death penalty for apostacy

Sorry, but I'm not sure what you're talking about. BhaiSaab 18:50, 17 September 2006 (UTC)