(copied from talk page.)
Dear Sm8900,
Again, thanks for your interest in
the mediation I am involved in. However, I would appreciate it if you would not make comments directly on the mediation talk page. As JaapBoBo said on 23 December, you are welcome to leave comments on either my or his user talk page, but the mediation page itself should be reserved only for me, JaapBoBo, and the mediator. Thank you for understanding and I trust it won't happen again. --
GHcool (
talk)
20:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, can you respond to this RfC for me, please? Thanks. ← Michael Safyan ( talk) 01:03, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, the link between the table of content of Gelber's book and the description of Gelber's theory in wikipedia (and how to title this) seems logical to me. They must fit to each other. And if they don't, it means wikipedia doesn't introduce Gelber's theory properly. And As I explained in the talk's page, Gelber doesn't try to find excuse or has not apologetic approach to the events of april-may 1948. You can be convinced of this in reading his book, if not, in writing to him or in reading his book table of contents if you don't agree proceeding to former two steps. Rgds, Ceedjee ( talk) 19:44, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
I hereby award you the "Defender of the Wiki Barnstar" for your tireless effort and brilliant execution; (sometimes with both hands tied behind the back); in defending Wikipedia in maintaining a neutral point of view on the most contentious articles regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict; (recently in Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus). Let others learn from you (me included), how it can be done with class. Itzse ( talk) 18:45, 11 April 2008 (UTC) |
He doesn't seem to have told you, but Timour Derevenko has nominated your userpage for deletion. You may wish to comment at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:GHcool. Sam Blacketer ( talk) 23:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I thought this might interest you. -- GHcool ( talk) 17:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi GHcool; I've just started something that has been on the great part missing in Wikipedia; and that is ancient Jewish coinage. I'm not good in formatting; so can I please ask you to organize it neatly. The articles so far affected are Hashmonean coinage and List of historical currencies with many more to come; time permitting. Thank you for any help you can give me. Itzse ( talk) 00:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
GHcool, u may find that strange, but i want to thank u for ur recent edits in history of arab israeli conflict, and camp david accords article, that ended the disputes we've had there. i hope u continue solving these matter the same way, and thanx again. One last pharaoh ( talk) 12:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
EdJohnston ( talk) 01:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi GHcool - I really think you should explain yourself and self-revert this according to this. Not mentioned there is that you appear to have stalked me to an article you'd never edited in 3 years. As you appeared to have stalked, and reverted, another article only 24 hours earlier. PR talk 00:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
At a recent complaint I've raised on ANI, editors have accused me of going against consensus. I request that, on top of editing the page with a (somewhat vague) direction to my discussion, [1] that you add a comment on the talk page that you agree with my statement. Cheers, Jaakobou Chalk Talk 07:09, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Your recent comments on WT:Israel (e.g. this) are pretty much in violation of WP:CANVAS as they are clearly requesting intervention on a certain side of the debates. Please refrain from making such comments in the future. Thanks, пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 21:38, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Please take notice of my comment here. Imad marie ( talk) 09:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi GHcool,
Yad Vashem is not a
WP:RS for Mufti's antisemitism. Benny Morris is a better one. Yad Vashem is taken explicitely as exemple by Idith Zertal (who is a wp:rs) as exacerbing this picture... Whatever, per wp:npov, we cannot write that he was antisemite given the is no consensus among historians concerning this. See the section I recently wrote in the article concerning this.
For the remaining, I think it is better to have a "short" lead. I don't see the importance of anything more. There is currently in the lead an exemple that illustrates each of his main traits : nationalist - antiZionist - alleged antisemite due to his collaboration with Nazi.
I suggest we discuss this when Nishidani is back. We have both agreed to work on this article.
Regards,
Ceedjee (
talk)
17:53, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
i beleive hezbollah has arab members, and arabs are semitic and their language is semitic, so you cannot accuse an arab of being anti semitic unless they hate themselves. RestoreTheEmpireSociety ( talk) 23:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Check Wikipedia:User_page#What may I not have on my user page?, point 9 to be exact, you are posting false information about me in your user page. Here is what I'm protesting to:
Please remove those points, if you don't I will remove it myself. And before you rush to revert or report me I suggest that you read the above wiki guideline well. Thanks. Imad marie ( talk) 06:15, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Note this. Imad marie ( talk) 06:42, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
While I'm not sure it specifically goes against policy, I've always personally felt that your practice of attributing the quotes to the specific editors who made them is a Bad Idea. In some ways, it strengthens your argument (then you know the quotes aren't "straw man" quotes) but I have harbored concerns about the compatibility of this practice with the collaborative spirit of Wikipedia.
I seem to remember overhearing you telling someone else than an admin or group of admins had vetted your User page and found it to be acceptable. Am I remembering correctly? If so, would you mind terribly referring me to who was involved in that, so I could speak to them? Don't worry, I'm not going to start a campaign to get your userpage changed :D I just want to talk to them and understand the reasoning. This is the second time your userpage has come up at WP:WQA, and I frankly am not sure what to tell people. If the admin involved previously could allay my concerns, then it would be a lot easier for me to address alerts such as this one.
Thanks! :) -- Jaysweet ( talk) 13:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
GHcool -- I hope you don't mind that I opened this thread to try and get more comments from admins and other experienced users about this situation. I would appreciate if you would limit your comments in that thread somewhat, so that we can get external opinions, although if you'd like to make a statement regarding your position, that would be fine and appreciated.
I am not trying to turn this into a witch hunt; I legitimately feel very uncertain as to whether certain aspects of your user page cross the line, and I need help from admins/other experienced editors. There is no offense intended on my part, and I am sure your User page is done with the best of intentions. I continue to feel that if the user names were removed (they would still be accessible via the diffs, just not broadcast on your page) then it would satisfy pretty much everyone's concerns, but if you really feel we have not made a "good argument" for this, that is okay. It just means I need to get additional opinions, because I'm at a loss! :) Anyway, hang in there, we'll get this sorted. -- Jaysweet ( talk) 14:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Hey, apart from the user page issue (still thinking about that one), I did not care for parts of this edit, particularly where you use the word "whining" and link to the funny picture. It's not helpful to disparage people in this way when we are trying to reach a compromise, and it could be construed as a personal attack. Please try to be more careful of this. Thanks!
In regards to the User page, as I said, I'm still thinking about that one... -- Jaysweet ( talk) 18:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
I have deleted and salted your user page following this discussion and WP:SOAP. Please feel free to comment as you see fit. I know you have been editing in good faith and do wish you all the best, Gwen Gale ( talk) 19:55, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) I have to declare a bias here. I have a very strong bias in favour of free speech, and that includes speech I don't like or find offensive (otherwise I'm not in favour of free speech at all). That means, for instance, that I think editors should be allowed to display userboxes supporting Hizbullah, even though I disagree with its violent tactics. I find it quite extraordinarily offensive when I see an admin removing such a userbox without the owner's permission. It feels like a burglar entering my house and taking away something valuable - and then being given official sanction to do so. I think GHcool has every right to be offensive (whether or not he intends the offence) on his user page.
I do not follow Gwen's assertion that GHcool is not being punished. If someone removed my userpage in that fashion, I would be very upset, and would regard it as a punishment. I also agree with Nishidani's point that GHcool should have been given a chance to defend himself.
So, with one important proviso, I am in favour of restoring GHcool's user page. The underlying reason is so obvious that I'm surprised nobody has mentioned it before (maybe somebody has - I haven't looked through all the past discussions). The proviso is that GHcool should remove all discussion of other editors from his user page. He has the right to express disagreement with other editors, but he should do so on the appropriate talk pages, where his targets (and others) can reply on equal terms. That way he can avoid the intrinsic dishonesty whereby casual browsers may not fully appreciate that GHcool is applying his own filter as to what part(s) of the argument appear on his user page.
If GHcool agrees to this proviso, I will support the restoration of his page.
--
NSH001 (
talk)
16:24, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
(e/c)
Some time ago, you participated in a deletion discussion concerning Allegations of Israeli apartheid. I thought you might like to know that the parent article, Allegations of apartheid, was recently nominated for deletion. Given that many of the issues that have been raised are essentially the same as those on the article on which you commented earlier, you may have a view on whether Allegations of apartheid should be kept or deleted. If you wish to contribute to the discussion, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allegations of apartheid (fifth nomination). -- ChrisO ( talk) 18:04, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
(copied from talk page.)
Dear Sm8900,
Again, thanks for your interest in
the mediation I am involved in. However, I would appreciate it if you would not make comments directly on the mediation talk page. As JaapBoBo said on 23 December, you are welcome to leave comments on either my or his user talk page, but the mediation page itself should be reserved only for me, JaapBoBo, and the mediator. Thank you for understanding and I trust it won't happen again. --
GHcool (
talk)
20:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, can you respond to this RfC for me, please? Thanks. ← Michael Safyan ( talk) 01:03, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, the link between the table of content of Gelber's book and the description of Gelber's theory in wikipedia (and how to title this) seems logical to me. They must fit to each other. And if they don't, it means wikipedia doesn't introduce Gelber's theory properly. And As I explained in the talk's page, Gelber doesn't try to find excuse or has not apologetic approach to the events of april-may 1948. You can be convinced of this in reading his book, if not, in writing to him or in reading his book table of contents if you don't agree proceeding to former two steps. Rgds, Ceedjee ( talk) 19:44, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
I hereby award you the "Defender of the Wiki Barnstar" for your tireless effort and brilliant execution; (sometimes with both hands tied behind the back); in defending Wikipedia in maintaining a neutral point of view on the most contentious articles regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict; (recently in Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus). Let others learn from you (me included), how it can be done with class. Itzse ( talk) 18:45, 11 April 2008 (UTC) |
He doesn't seem to have told you, but Timour Derevenko has nominated your userpage for deletion. You may wish to comment at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:GHcool. Sam Blacketer ( talk) 23:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I thought this might interest you. -- GHcool ( talk) 17:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi GHcool; I've just started something that has been on the great part missing in Wikipedia; and that is ancient Jewish coinage. I'm not good in formatting; so can I please ask you to organize it neatly. The articles so far affected are Hashmonean coinage and List of historical currencies with many more to come; time permitting. Thank you for any help you can give me. Itzse ( talk) 00:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
GHcool, u may find that strange, but i want to thank u for ur recent edits in history of arab israeli conflict, and camp david accords article, that ended the disputes we've had there. i hope u continue solving these matter the same way, and thanx again. One last pharaoh ( talk) 12:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
EdJohnston ( talk) 01:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi GHcool - I really think you should explain yourself and self-revert this according to this. Not mentioned there is that you appear to have stalked me to an article you'd never edited in 3 years. As you appeared to have stalked, and reverted, another article only 24 hours earlier. PR talk 00:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
At a recent complaint I've raised on ANI, editors have accused me of going against consensus. I request that, on top of editing the page with a (somewhat vague) direction to my discussion, [1] that you add a comment on the talk page that you agree with my statement. Cheers, Jaakobou Chalk Talk 07:09, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Your recent comments on WT:Israel (e.g. this) are pretty much in violation of WP:CANVAS as they are clearly requesting intervention on a certain side of the debates. Please refrain from making such comments in the future. Thanks, пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 21:38, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Please take notice of my comment here. Imad marie ( talk) 09:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi GHcool,
Yad Vashem is not a
WP:RS for Mufti's antisemitism. Benny Morris is a better one. Yad Vashem is taken explicitely as exemple by Idith Zertal (who is a wp:rs) as exacerbing this picture... Whatever, per wp:npov, we cannot write that he was antisemite given the is no consensus among historians concerning this. See the section I recently wrote in the article concerning this.
For the remaining, I think it is better to have a "short" lead. I don't see the importance of anything more. There is currently in the lead an exemple that illustrates each of his main traits : nationalist - antiZionist - alleged antisemite due to his collaboration with Nazi.
I suggest we discuss this when Nishidani is back. We have both agreed to work on this article.
Regards,
Ceedjee (
talk)
17:53, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
i beleive hezbollah has arab members, and arabs are semitic and their language is semitic, so you cannot accuse an arab of being anti semitic unless they hate themselves. RestoreTheEmpireSociety ( talk) 23:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Check Wikipedia:User_page#What may I not have on my user page?, point 9 to be exact, you are posting false information about me in your user page. Here is what I'm protesting to:
Please remove those points, if you don't I will remove it myself. And before you rush to revert or report me I suggest that you read the above wiki guideline well. Thanks. Imad marie ( talk) 06:15, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Note this. Imad marie ( talk) 06:42, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
While I'm not sure it specifically goes against policy, I've always personally felt that your practice of attributing the quotes to the specific editors who made them is a Bad Idea. In some ways, it strengthens your argument (then you know the quotes aren't "straw man" quotes) but I have harbored concerns about the compatibility of this practice with the collaborative spirit of Wikipedia.
I seem to remember overhearing you telling someone else than an admin or group of admins had vetted your User page and found it to be acceptable. Am I remembering correctly? If so, would you mind terribly referring me to who was involved in that, so I could speak to them? Don't worry, I'm not going to start a campaign to get your userpage changed :D I just want to talk to them and understand the reasoning. This is the second time your userpage has come up at WP:WQA, and I frankly am not sure what to tell people. If the admin involved previously could allay my concerns, then it would be a lot easier for me to address alerts such as this one.
Thanks! :) -- Jaysweet ( talk) 13:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
GHcool -- I hope you don't mind that I opened this thread to try and get more comments from admins and other experienced users about this situation. I would appreciate if you would limit your comments in that thread somewhat, so that we can get external opinions, although if you'd like to make a statement regarding your position, that would be fine and appreciated.
I am not trying to turn this into a witch hunt; I legitimately feel very uncertain as to whether certain aspects of your user page cross the line, and I need help from admins/other experienced editors. There is no offense intended on my part, and I am sure your User page is done with the best of intentions. I continue to feel that if the user names were removed (they would still be accessible via the diffs, just not broadcast on your page) then it would satisfy pretty much everyone's concerns, but if you really feel we have not made a "good argument" for this, that is okay. It just means I need to get additional opinions, because I'm at a loss! :) Anyway, hang in there, we'll get this sorted. -- Jaysweet ( talk) 14:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Hey, apart from the user page issue (still thinking about that one), I did not care for parts of this edit, particularly where you use the word "whining" and link to the funny picture. It's not helpful to disparage people in this way when we are trying to reach a compromise, and it could be construed as a personal attack. Please try to be more careful of this. Thanks!
In regards to the User page, as I said, I'm still thinking about that one... -- Jaysweet ( talk) 18:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
I have deleted and salted your user page following this discussion and WP:SOAP. Please feel free to comment as you see fit. I know you have been editing in good faith and do wish you all the best, Gwen Gale ( talk) 19:55, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) I have to declare a bias here. I have a very strong bias in favour of free speech, and that includes speech I don't like or find offensive (otherwise I'm not in favour of free speech at all). That means, for instance, that I think editors should be allowed to display userboxes supporting Hizbullah, even though I disagree with its violent tactics. I find it quite extraordinarily offensive when I see an admin removing such a userbox without the owner's permission. It feels like a burglar entering my house and taking away something valuable - and then being given official sanction to do so. I think GHcool has every right to be offensive (whether or not he intends the offence) on his user page.
I do not follow Gwen's assertion that GHcool is not being punished. If someone removed my userpage in that fashion, I would be very upset, and would regard it as a punishment. I also agree with Nishidani's point that GHcool should have been given a chance to defend himself.
So, with one important proviso, I am in favour of restoring GHcool's user page. The underlying reason is so obvious that I'm surprised nobody has mentioned it before (maybe somebody has - I haven't looked through all the past discussions). The proviso is that GHcool should remove all discussion of other editors from his user page. He has the right to express disagreement with other editors, but he should do so on the appropriate talk pages, where his targets (and others) can reply on equal terms. That way he can avoid the intrinsic dishonesty whereby casual browsers may not fully appreciate that GHcool is applying his own filter as to what part(s) of the argument appear on his user page.
If GHcool agrees to this proviso, I will support the restoration of his page.
--
NSH001 (
talk)
16:24, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
(e/c)
Some time ago, you participated in a deletion discussion concerning Allegations of Israeli apartheid. I thought you might like to know that the parent article, Allegations of apartheid, was recently nominated for deletion. Given that many of the issues that have been raised are essentially the same as those on the article on which you commented earlier, you may have a view on whether Allegations of apartheid should be kept or deleted. If you wish to contribute to the discussion, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allegations of apartheid (fifth nomination). -- ChrisO ( talk) 18:04, 12 July 2008 (UTC)