![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 |
May I ask if you understand Latin? I am looking for a translation of this text, pp. 159-160, from 1151 CE, involving "Calandriam", which is Kalandia today. From translate.google I understand they (=the canons of the Holy Sepulchre) are leasing some land to a "Nemes Suriano", and his children and grandchildren?? Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 18:44, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Whatever any prelate of the holy church concedes to anyone by the assent of his chapter, it is necessary that this be recorded for future memory by the firm bond of writing, lest, as time passes, what had been concluded earlier by his decree, might give rise to contestations and therefore perhaps lead to repetitious quarrels. Therefore I, Amalricus prior of the Holy Sepulchre, and the whole assembly of its clergy yield over to Nemes the Syrian and to his sons and the sons of his brother Anthony the lands and vineyards which they have in Calandria, and which he and his sons and the sons of his brother Anthony might eventually acquire in the future, so that they may take possession of them under a perpetual oath, but on condition that they will faithfully hand over, every year half of the fruits of the land, namely of all of the vineyards and orchards, which they have already planted or which they shall plant in the future. And in order that our concession in the present as in future times may obtain an abiding force, we confirm the deed with the present paper and our seal. Below are the signatories. Nishidani ( talk) 20:56, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
There's a story untold on the Lehi page. Much of the time Lehi thought they were negotiating with an Italian representative they were actually talking to a British agent. It was a successful sting operation that Lehi's supporters have long sought to suppress (out of embarrassment, presumably). I don't recall what the best source is, but I'll dig it up. Zero talk 04:15, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
-- Al Ameer ( talk) 06:16, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Take a look at Talk:Bardala, Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 19:06, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
User:Yambaram:Incivility, slurs and accusations of antisemitism All that was asked, was answered, fairly, simply and neatly. Nishidani ( talk) 14:35, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
— alf laylah wa laylah ( talk) 15:37, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Anup. I was just moving by recent changes. Thought I would leave you a msg requesting you to remove {{retired|emeritus editor}} template from your talk page. Welcome back to Wikipedia. Cheers! Anup Mehra ✈ 11:59, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
you! But some people don't think so. I'll be so bold as to predict the outcome of that matter will be: "We told you so". -- Shirt58 ( talk) 13:38, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Greetings, does your (wide) field of expertise extend to Jewish Christianity? Supposed Hebrew Gospels and so forth? In ictu oculi ( talk) 15:02, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Nishidani, on the Talk-page of the Gospel of Matthew you wrote: "...the importance for some Church theologians of establishing a Hebrew precedence in an environment where both Jewish and Christians competed for converts vigorously, where rabbinic hostility to Yeshua and ecclesiastical suppression of variant traditions deleted much of the then available evidence." Can you recite any historical documents attesting to this fact? It seems more likely to me that the passages quoted by Jerome, Eusebius, Origen, Irenaeus and Epiphanius from the original Gospel of Matthew (which was written in the Aramaic language and in Hebrew characters), and which Jerome had seen in the Library of Caesarea, is proof that the original text was not tampered with. It simply did not contain the genealogical record that now appears in the canonical text of Matthew (a later interpolation). Some think that these contradictory genealogical records in Matthew and Luke were added in order to counter the claim that Jesus may have been born of illegitimate birth.
According to Epiphanius (Anacephalaiosis 13.1): "The beginning of the Gospel among them reads: It happened in the days of Herod the king of Judea (at a time when Caiaphas was high priest) that a certain John came, baptizing the baptism of conversion in the river Jordan. Of him it is said that he was from the family of Aaron the priest, the son of Zacharias and Elisabeth. And all went out to him. […] It happened that John baptized and the Pharisees went out to him and were baptized and all Jerusalem. And John was dressed in a mantle of camel's hair and a leather belt was round his waist. And his food was, it is said, wild honey, of which the taste was that of manna, like cakes in olive oil.” It is worthy to note that the style of this original Aramaic Gospel of Matthew was similar in style to an earlier MS, viz., the Aramaic Scroll of Antiochus, whose introduction is strikingly similar to the Aramaic Gospel of Matthew, as if Matthew tried to emulate the style of the former. Davidbena ( talk) 12:38, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
The problem is not to convince oneself, most of us have that fateful flaw in our characters: the problem is to convince one's peers that 'everyone is out of step but me, Johnny', to adopt my mother's ancient admonition for eccentric ideas. Pilpul's methods, however intricate, are generally not those of historical criticism and textual analysis. Formal source analysis is what you lack: I can see it in the way you marshal evidence.
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:38, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
more than one year and one month late old chap. better late than never but not if all you are going to do is pen some tired cliches lacking accents (with a weak pun as a sorry bone to chew on). i'm afraid that my grey matter is not what it used to be after firing out a couple of life projects and holding on for dear life lest i lose track of one of these celestially bound bodies whose adventures never cease to amaze me. take care and if some cells should miraculously regenerate with time, i will see you again soon. Tiamut talk 20:06, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Nishidani, I've now set up automatic archiving for this enormous talk page of yours. It will never archive the "The West Bank/Judea and Samaria Problem" section at the top of this page. Some details:
The archiving bot will not bother you with any notifications that it's done its work (none of my doing, that's just how the bot is set up). So don't be surprised when you find bits of your talk page have disappeared down the archive plug hole.
And with a bit of luck, neither of us should have to worry any more (at least, not for a few years) about archiving this page. Regards,
-- NSH001 ( talk) 12:14, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. You are correct on what you wrote in your edit summary here. But I think the wording was used for the whole part, not only that about the occupation. However, all of the points there, except for collective punishment, is undisputed. So maybe it is better to have it like it is now but change to "and what they describe as collective punishment". Any thoughts? -- IRISZOOM ( talk) 20:03, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
This is a first indeed. We did come to some good compromises, but I don't think we ever agreed on anything before. Debresser ( talk) 00:57, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Ah, Nishidani, this time I must disagree. "Reticent to" is attested in English since 1875 according to the OED:
2. Reluctant to perform a particular action; hesitant, disinclined. Chiefly with about, or to do something.
1875 Rep. Sel. Comm. Condition of South (43rd U.S. Congr. 2 Sess.) 15 The State registrar was just as reticent to give us information.
1932 Daily Capital News & Post Tribune (Jefferson City, Missouri) 14 Feb. 11 a/6 They were reticent about leaving it [sc. home].
1948 Jrnl. Amer. Folklore 61 29 Dreams, promptings of the spirit, and peep-stones have all combined to make the reticent girl give in to the proposals of a polygamous suitor.
1959 Times 8 Oct. 13 Having..informed my employer of my impending call-up, he is naturally reticent to improve my position.
2008 F. Kellerman Mercedes Coffin xxxviii. 311 She knows he'd be reticent to hire a lawyer to defend her?
It seems to have begun in America, though, but did make it into The Times by 1959. In all other aspects of the discussion we concur, of course.— alf laylah wa laylah ( talk) 17:31, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi - with this edit [1] I'm guessing that you moved material from another article but didn't put a link to that article in your edit summary (that needs to be fixed with a dummy edit to avoid copyvio). My problem is that you didn't bring over the references, so we have Brook 2009 and Brook 2010 without a clue as to what these are. I've just reverted someone who replaced one of those with a website (which at least was selling his book among others, so some relevance). Can you please fix this? Thanks. And, um, Sheba? Dougweller ( talk) 15:44, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
You may find this of interest.
In the mid-1980s, when I worked at Al-Fajr Newspaper, a friend of mine was teaching English in a village in the West Bank. She wanted to do a lesson on active and passive voice, and for this purpose she photocopied reports of the same clashes between Palestinians and Israeli forces, as published in both the Jerusalem Post and Al-Fajr English Weekly. Where the JP routinely reported that "x Palestinians were injured", "y houses were demolished", AF reported that "Israeli forces injured x Palestinians, destroyed y homes". It's a lesson her pupils never forgot!
Happy weekend. RolandR ( talk) 21:35, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
...because it could have been preached equally well on Saturday morning as on Sunday. Nicely done.— alf laylah wa laylah ( talk) 23:06, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
The Socratic Barnstar | |
For your wisdom in the analysis of the mess that was the Gilabrand AE case, and the wisdom that your comments continue to show. The Israel-Palestine area needs more editors like you. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:56, 10 March 2014 (UTC) |
"Armenians as Amalekites: Fixing an horrendous confusion of displaced sourcing, WP:OR. If you edit in anything, please follow standard principles.". This was not my work. I restored material a new editor deleted without cause or comment. The critique is meant for the prior editor that added that material. Alatari ( talk) 15:41, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
(2)'To call Dickens "Kaizanian" would be an over-statement of his considerable gift for for creating memorable characters, while to call Kaizan "Dickensian" would be a seriously misleading understatement. This richness became all the more impressive when set against the national drive towards human standardization.' ibid. p.430
To be kept close to the bottom of this page because I forget the agenda as time scurries on Nishidani ( talk) 21:00, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You participated to a discussion on that article. A brief opinion would be welcome here. Pluto2012 ( talk) 17:54, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Although you were right to remove that silly passage about Khazars being more mongoloid in a certain region, I'd like to bring your attention to this. Notice the beginning of page 4. Khazar ( talk) 23:19, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
You get endless bad reportage in mainstream newspapers. Counterpunch is not stricto sensu RS, but this article should be accepted. Nishidani ( talk) 17:32, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:31, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Nishidani! I would ask you to reconsider the comment with which you reverted my edit at [2]. I know about Aikhenvald as a linguist, but that is not even at issue here. Bibliographies about living persons are not supposed to contain any unsourced information. The entire paragraph was unsourced, so it was appropriate to delete it. And so was your revert during which you added a source. Best, G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:51, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Nishidani, I know you've spent a lot of time and said a lot on this AN/I case, but I hope you go to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed topic ban and either voice your support or opposition. From reading your statements, I think I know your position but right now, the voting could go any which way (topic ban, indefinite block, both) and since you made the original complaint, I think what you say will carry a lot of weight. As an editor who is continually and persistently reverted by Evildoer at every turn, I find myself in the peculiar position of speaking up for him, if he can work on his attitude and sourcing. Liz Read! Talk! 01:20, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
The Socratic Barnstar | |
I was meaning to thank you months ago but I forgot to. You've single handedly turned the Khazars article into one worthy of FA status. Not only is it free of edit wars now, but it's nice to be able to read one of my favorite articles without seeing it shrink or inflate with original research. :)))) Khazar ( talk) 20:08, 12 May 2014 (UTC) |
Deeply appreciated, but I couldn't have gotten it into shape alone. I might have done a fair bit of the work, but it was an environment of several posters like yourself, Laszlo, Andrew and Jeepez (I hope I've forgotten no one, but at my age . .), ready to read closely, curb edit warriors, and check that constituted the sine qua non of anything accomplished there. Teamwork by people with a critical independence can do wonders, and no one main editor should forget that debt. Cheers Nishidani ( talk) 21:11, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Nishidani, since you edit in the broad area of the Middle East, I'd welcome your opinion in the discussion on the deletion of the Semitic peoples' categories. The question about these categories seems to hinge on whether or not the editor believes Semitic is correctly applied to people or if it should be restricted to describing certain topics, like language, geography or history. Please weigh in at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 May 11#Category:People of Semitic descent. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 14:50, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
I don't want to be a headache but your experience with fringe theories are needed here. Khazar ( talk) 23:43, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
We use only mainstream newspaper sources for the I/P area updates. A half a day ago, Kerry touched on the risks Israel ran of becoming an apartheid state unless progress was made in serious peace talks. Well, in fifteen hours, Al Jazeera noted it almost immediately, as did the Jerusalem Post, The Times of Israel and Front Page Magazine; it took a mere 5 for Haaretz to note the fact; Ynet registered the news after 7 hours. The NYTs is still twiddling its thumbs, trying to work out how to spin this, on its not-yet-breaking news breaking news page. On the other hand it has the latest updates on sanctions against Russia, and was first off the block to shout that 'Egypt Sentences More Than 680 to Death'. On important I/P information, every dot and comma must be cross-checked, every stylistic nuance, every detail in the ostensible troublesome balance sheet must be calculated. In short, why bother? Nishidani ( talk) 13:58, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- "You cannot by an act of parliament strip 20% of the citizenry of their native rights,". Yes, of course. These people should keep the Israeli citizenship, but what about their newborn babies? there is a precedent of British citizens, that their newborn babies are not inheriting the British citizenship, if the baby is born overseas.(I am not familiar with the details.)
- "Baqa al-Gharbiyye is separated from its West Bank sister city, Baqa ash-Sharqiyya (or Baqa East) by the Israeli West Bank barrier which in this section coincides with the Green Line.[16 As a result, a concrete wall topped with barbed wire runs through one neighbourhood."]. Does not it make sense that the border will move such as both Baqa villages will be united within a Palestinian state? Ykantor ( talk) 20:25, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
The Guardian - Chris McGreal - Kerry wasn't wrong: Israel's future is beginning to look a lot like apartheid, 14 May 2014:
← ZScarpia 23:28, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Could any of the young whiz kids out there tell me where the New York Times reported the news that Martin Indyk might resign from his role as Special Envoy, which caused a flurry of articles all over Israel and in many foreign papers? Thanks Nishidani ( talk) 15:45, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Are there any maps uploadable for the disposition of Yishuv forces on the 13/14 May 1948 set against the Nov.30 Partition plan map? One exists, and can be viewed at 17.15 minutes into Salman Abu Sitta's lecture on the Right of Return here. His argument is that on the day of the 'Arab Invasion' , Yishuv forces were already outside the lines allocated to them. Nishidani ( talk) 19:52, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
a demonstration on Nakba Day—the anniversary of Israel’s Declaration of Independence in 1948. (Jonathan S. Tobin, 'Was Nakba Shooting Another al-Dura Libel?,' Commentary Magazine 21 May 2014.)
Date | Place | Target | Description | Action | Executor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
May 15, 2014 | Beitunia, West Bank | Nadeem Siam Nawara(17); Mohammad Mahmoud Odeh Salameh(16). A third student, Mohammed Aza, was shot through the lungs | Students | Shot dead in the back in two separate incidents (73 minutes apart) after a demonstration involving rock throwing outside Ofer Prison. | Israel Border Police. [2] [3] [4] [5] |
Nishidani ( talk) 13:31, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
It said at the top that you can only revert once every 24 hours on that page if you Edit it. You might be blocked now, you reverted twice! XD The Toon Disney Guy ( talk) 11:51, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
I asked Alison if an IP was JarlaxleArtemis and she confirmed and blocked several accounts and another IP. Dougweller ( talk) 14:08, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
The Beitunia shootings incident probably deserves its own article at some point given the coverage, although perhaps it's too soon. Anyhow, you may not have seen a more recent NYT article [3] B'Tselem seem to be keeping track of the media reports. [4] Sean.hoyland - talk 12:40, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
One can't add that to the list, despite the fact that we know who gave the order (now Brig. Gen.) Roni Numa, who, Ofir, relayed the decision to 'neutralize' a Palestinian businessman (driving in a car with his wife and brother-in-law and children), to the two snipers who then shot him dead. It's the best documented example of the genre, but is not classified yet in the targeted assassinations lists. Indeed no internet search will tell you the day the incident occurred, nor the name of the person. Of the several thousand killed so far, on my reading, several hundred would fit that description of being deliberately targeted, though not militants. But we can't do WP:OR syntheses or draw conclusions.
The other relevant point to consider is system bias. For instance, while we don't have an article for the Beitunia killings, there is already an article for an event less than three days old - 2014 kidnapping of Israeli teens (an example of the format described by Nishidani: "using a selective set of sources to underline the viviousness of Palestinians"). A prodigious output of (POV) articles covering Israeli victims of the the conflict while not covering Palestinian victims is a problem. Dlv999 ( talk) 10:49, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
FatGuySeven (
talk)
03:22, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! FatGuySeven ( talk) 16:15, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
For the record, it absolutely is him - even down to denying his identity (he also denied that he was Grawp until that was proven). He reacts instinctively - any time anyone challenges his edits, he starts making unicode-infused, empty, cowardly threats against them. As if this had ever worked. This has been going on for ten years, since he was 15, and he hasn't changed a bit. NawlinWiki ( talk) 14:43, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, regarding your comment at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement: you seem to have forgotten to sign it. Any full RfC about the matter would be flooded with socks, me thinks. Perhaps we should start finding links to all those off-wiki reports of canvassing, and then show the damage (=huge waste of time) throw-away sock do in the I/P area, and then take it to Arb.com? Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 20:35, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
I've filed a sockpuppet case at /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Smatprt. Tom Reedy ( talk) 13:36, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
Have a beer! Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 22:01, 3 July 2014 (UTC) |
Btw, one very easy task: on Umm al-Fahm Guerin writes that it has "dix huit cents" inhabitants. Isn´t that 1800? Petersen, citing Guerin, say it is 800? Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 22:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Nishidani....
Just letting you know :) user Gunrpks reported me for "reverting" his editorial wars on your article concerning the war in the middle east. I am a new user and have never reported some one before but I will try to report him as well. -- علي سمسم ( talk) 12:35, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
In any case, I would advise you not to report him, it is a bad practice, esp. by newbies, to use this. It looks like playing tactical games to out an 'adversary'. Be patience, calm, succinct, in your reply, and if you check the evidence and find you have made an error, apologize. Above all, do not transform your reply into a long screed. Trust administrators to see into it. They have better eyes than most of us, most of the time. Nishidani ( talk) 13:07, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you :)-- علي سمسم ( talk) 13:16, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. AlanS ( talk) 14:37, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
I find it chills me more than coffee! I think we can work well together, because of, more than despite, our differing POVs. I think most editors misuse or fail to grasp the positives of that dynamic, in many contentious areas. Cheers :) Irondome ( talk) 00:22, 12 July 2014 (UTC) |
But now that I see what the removed 150 odd attacks by this Nishidumbass sockster wrote, I wonder at the puerile lack of an ability to connect one's thoughts to real history. Willing death on others in order to defend one's 'ethnic vitalism' is of course a Nazi cast of mind, and therefore, ipso facto unacceptable for anyone with the genocide of WW2 still vivid in recall.
Hitler once said:’ We shall regain our health only by eliminating the Jew.' Manfred Henningsen, ‘The Politics of Purity and Exclusion,’ Björn H. Jernudd, Michael J. Shapiro (eds.), The Politics of Language Purism, Mouton de Gruyter 1989 pp.31-52 p.48 Same pathology in the sock who thinks eliminating Christians, Europeans, Arabs and wikipedia will somehow secure the survival of Israel. Even if that happened I would survive, I guess, being a pagan, and only 'European' by adoption. Then again, if wikipedia was killed off, I might just, qua Nishidani, croak with it! Nishidani ( talk) 07:34, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring Tritomex ( talk) 11:06, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 20:21, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Ho, mikado! First, is there maybe a missing "a" in the time since your retirement. Second as someone who knows something about the topic, you might maybe be interested in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity/Noticeboard#Userspace drafts. John Carter ( talk) 20:49, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:30, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Good article, [5] nableezy - 22:56, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Gazan farmers are legally forbidden to reclaim their own land unless they obtain permission from the Israeli military authorities.
Gaza expanded its trade in the late 1950s to the COMECON countries of Eastern Europe. .. Immediately after the June 1967 war, all Western markets were banned to Gazan exporters in order to preclude competition with Israeli agricultural producers and then, as now, to limit Gaza's access to foreign economic and political circles.
Restrictions on export markets also extend to the Israeli market.Presently, Gaza's farmers are prohibited from marketing most fruits and vegetables inside Israel, a measure designed to avoid competition with Israeli products. . .Certain products, such as strawberries, eggplants, and zucchini, which are not competitive with Israeli products, are allowed to enter Israel's markets through the Vegetable Marketing Board . . citrus products are also exported to Israel from Gaza for use in juice factories. Israeli producers, on the other hand, have unlimited access to Gazan markets, exporting substantial quantities of fruits and vegetables at prices with which Gazan farmers are unable to compete.
In light of the critical water problems inside Gaza, the Israeli government, through its affiliated water company, Mekorot, has issued restrictions against the digging of new wells and has limited the amount of water that Palestinian farmers may use, These same restriction on water consumption, however, do not apply to the Israeli settlements inside the Strip, which have installed 35-40 new wells in recent years, . . According to the Israeli Water Commission, in 1985 alone, Israelis living in the Gaza Strip consumed, per capita, 2,326 cubic meters of water compared to an average consumption of 123 cubic meters for every Gazan
Nishidani ( talk) 11:52, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Guess you'll be needing that again, then... Yunshui 雲 水 10:35, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
瀉水置平地
各自東西南北流
人生亦有命
安能行嘆復坐愁
酌酒以自寬
舉杯斷絕歌路難
心非木石豈無感
吞聲躑躅不敢言. Best regards, Nishidani ( talk) 11:10, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi! I think you've missed a discussion occurred at here. Please participate the discussion by presenting your ideas about the background section. Best Mhhossein ( talk) 21:39, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:32, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
I fixed this up as best I could; please note edit summary contents and hidden text. The list has issues. For one thing, the number of wounded is very hard to specify with any kind of exactitude which is what I think you are (understandably) trying to do. Also, some of the links are no longer active. Best of luck. Quis separabit? 00:45, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
User Evildoer187, has returned to Wikipedia and has violated his topic ban. This ip belongs to him and he is using it to avoid his topic ban. He states in this edit summary that it belongs to him. AcidSnow ( talk) 17:11, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
It is good to see that the article pertaining to the Gaza-Israel situation has been somewhat restrained as of late and is keeping as neutral of a view as is seemingly possible for an article like this. In the mean time, if anything gets out of hand, look at this pretty kitten!
Jab843 (
talk)
16:31, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
May I asked what I wrote that what biased and not just the inclusion of facts? Looking at your page you seem to biased and a bit antisemitic, I think I'll consult more neutral parties. -- monochrome_ monitor 10:24, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:(5) 'he has been called antisemitic many times before. I'm just one of many to object.' Monochrome Monitor.
Nishidani ( talk) 18:41, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Take your outrage elsewhere, maybe the Electronic Intifada or Richard Fink''le''stein
Hello again. I apologize for my unfounded libeling of you as antisemitic. I only skimmed your page and decided without credence that you reverted my edit due to an ulterior motive because it was easier than actually debating it. I certainly won't vilify you again. I hope that we can both make Wikipedia a more comprehensive knowledge base while avoiding confrontation in the meantime. Thanks, (and I'll be more careful about omitting my nonfinite verbs!) -- monochrome_ monitor 00:23, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
I am mentoring MM, I decided to shortly before I left. I should have "publicised" it somehow, or told MM, but I didnt. I think if I had been around, we all could have agreed to put it away days ago. I have spoken to her, and I reproduce fully my initial email, knocked out about 2 hrs after I got home. I trust MM will not object.
Hi Georgia :)
Now listen up.
a/ I am not happy with you calling Nishi d an anti-semite. As a Jew who was 16 in 1978 allow me some advantage here. I can smell an anti-semite at 12,000 miles and no, neither he nor Sean are. I have studied N's writings through a microscope, my anti-semite detector lens. It reads zero. His writing has always been deeply respectful of the Jewish people and religion, and has explicitly and repeatedly spelled out the positive aspects of the state of Israel. He admires its democratic institutions and it's plurality, its scientific and cultural and economic achievements. He just demands from his own POV, a moralistic action-based series of measures from Israel. He is not a existential Israel rejectionist. He holds to the 2 state solution as far as I can see. The same seems to go for Sean. As for user pages, my own handle alone is provocation enough to the inexperienced ;)
b/ I advise you go to N's page and apologise. You can freely quote the contents of these mails. Then we can see what we can do about that scappy mess of a fight that I am wading through. Have you been banned in any way? It does not look like it from my scan-reading so far. I will go to N's page too if necessary. We have mutual repect. Say I was out of town as your mentor and take full responsibility. Never throw the AS charge around Georgia, unless you are DAMN sure, and you have consulted with me.
Apart from that you are doing ok. You will be intellectually roughed up sometimes, but you will grow. IMPROVE YOUR GRAMMAR. LOL
Shalom!
S
your thoughtful commentary here. I know a (very) elderly man who survived the Warsaw uprising and the concentration camps, and he wholeheartedly agrees with you. - Darouet ( talk) 19:38, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
What is it that makes you think you have to perspective to even venture such a ludicrous and overreaching comment? What is it that makes you want to demonize the Ancient Greeks and the Romans?...the ancient Greeks and Romans, and in fact even thousands of years even before the advent of these two fascist, ancient so-called 'civilizations' whose elite pretended they were 'democratic' or 'republican'
I forgot about your "to-do" list - so I've set it up near the top of this page, where you can easily find it. It will stay there and will never be archived. -- NSH001 ( talk) 05:51, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
This is an amazing decision, The decision says that "Wickey-nl is temperamentally unsuited to editing this controversial topic area", based wholly on intemperate responses on the WP:AE page. Nobody could point to any edit on article or talk pages which demonstrates this. The evidence presented by Brewcrewer was ignored completely (rightly) and most of the evidence presented by Shrike was also deemed not actionable. There was indeed the issue of bias, but who doesn't have bias in I/P area? I certainly do, and a very strong one.
The exchange on the talk page and the spat with admins was indeed wrong. But it is amazing to me that if Wickey-nl had simply made no statement at all, he would probably not have even got a sanction, except perhaps a warning. This shows me that the admins have wholly made the decision based on responses on the WP:AE page and 'social' skills rather than any edits on actual articles or their talk pages.
I wonder how someone can judge whether someone is suited to edit in an area without editing in the area, or even evaluating the content of the person's edits? Four other editors (including myself) who actually edit in ARBPIA talked about the content of the edits, and giving neutral-to-good assessment, but they were ignored. Coming on the heels of the decision to topic-ban Sean.hoyland, it makes me very sad and annoyed about the ARBPIA sanctions process. Kingsindian ( talk) 18:32, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Talk:Israelites. And the article itself. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 08:12, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
You seem to be the only one who has a considerable amount of influence regarding that page. I'm surprised how people don't understand the policies regarding WP:SYNTHESIS, WP:OR, AND WP:FRINGE. They want to mention "Levantine origins" in the same sentence as "coalesced in the Roman empire" despite the fact that there's an entire paragraph in the lead covering the former topic. Take a look for yourself. Khazar ( talk) 19:06, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
@ Nishidani: Yeah, and well, the tradition is wrong. It has been proven incorrect by DNA analysis. The Kuthim from Iraq would not have the Cohen gene, they would most likely not even be from J1a, but from J2, and if they were from J1a it would not be in the same northwest semitic cluster as the CMH. There are many areas where the tradition is wrong. I just do not think that the Israelites sat around deciding to completely make stuff up just to frustrate the efforts of future archeologists. I think that if a very specific, rather mundane, emphasis is placed in the Tanakh on something like the location of Beth Shemesh, or the northern border of Dan, I don't think they would go out of their way, or even have any incentive, to make nonsense up. For one, the people reading it at the time would have said, wait a second, this is incorrect the border of Dan is not over here. It would discredit the Tanakh in the eyes of the people. Even if you assume the entire Tanakh was written in 400 BCE by Ezra, the people living at the time would have a cultural memory of the borders of their land, their lineages, what distinguished them from other ethnic groups, who their actual kings were, et cetera. It used to be assumed there was no real difference in lineage between Celtic and Germanic nations, now because of DNA testing we know they are founded by two totally different haplogroups, one form R and the other from I. The lineage of the Israelites from a man who lived in the late bronze age, and immigrated to Canaan from the Aramaeans in Syria, I think is most likely true, I don't know, but why would anyone make up a story so specific, that is not even very epic? I mean, if you are going to make up a false origin, why not do it like the Romans or Greeks and claim you were founded by gods who fought some mythological beast, why the idiosyncratic and boring origin of an Aramaean traveler?-- Newmancbn ( talk) 18:49, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, unless my bifocals are acting up, I think the header title for the "Day 12 Saturday 19 July" chart is duplicated. I tried to fix by tweaking but couldn't. Quis separabit? 13:53, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
I said parts of the text were POV, I didn't say there weren't legitimate comments in there. However, is there were many POV comments in there it is proper to revert it and allow the user who posted it to fix it and put it back. You now just put back POV comments, as I had clearly explained was the reason I did it. I suggest you either fix up his POV comments or undue your revert. - Galatz ( talk) 15:23, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
The conflagration caused heavy casualties on both sides and was described by Col. Lee as "artillery Hell."[21] Seeing the glint of Confederate bayonets concealed in the Cornfield, Hooker halted his infantry and brought up four batteries of artillery, which fired shell and canister over the heads of the Federal infantry, covering the field. All at once, the cornfield exploded into chaos as a savage battle raged through the area. Men beat each other over the head with rifle butts and stabbed each other with bayonets. Officers rode around on their horses swearing and cursing and yelling orders no one could hear in the noise. Rifles became hot and fouled from too much firing. The air was filled with a hail of bullets and shells.
Lt. Col. Joseph S. Fullerton wrote, "Kennesaw smoked and blazed with fire, a volcano as grand as Etna." Battle of Kennesaw Mountain
Regarding your edit here. I had earlier included it in the section below, though in a condensed form. So might be just duplication. Kingsindian ( talk) 22:04, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
B'Tselem has documented 59 incidents of bombing and shelling, in which 458 people have been killed. [1]
B'tselem has compiled an infogram listing families killed at home in 72 incidents of bombing or shelling, comprising 547 people killed, of whom 125 were women under 60, 250 were minors, and 29 were over 60.(should read:'According to B'tselem's infogram of 72 bombing/shelling incidents involving 547 people among families killed at home, 125 were women under 60, 250 were minors, and 29 were over 60.') [2]
Not necessarily your cup of tea I know but if you wanted to subject yourself to being involved here it would be appreciated as you are probably one of our better informed people in general. John Carter ( talk) 18:18, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
DRN discussion on Hamas rockets. TheTimesAreAChanging ( talk) 03:11, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Very decent of you, after me not always behaving in the most civil manner. WarKosign ( talk) 08:30, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi. You forgot to add your signature here. -- IRISZOOM ( talk) 14:06, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive265#Move War at History of the Jews in Nepal, and RFC review that concerns you because you were recently involved with one or more of the related Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of the Jews in Nepal, Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 June 30 ( History of the Jews in Nepal), Talk:History of the Jews in Nepal#RfC: Should we change article name to 'Judaism in Nepal'?. Thank you, IZAK ( talk) 09:06, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Is there a source to "many of which have resulted in mass civilian deaths" [6]?. MarciulionisHOF ( talk) 14:56, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Consider reverting only when necessary. BRD does not encourage reverting, but recognises that reverts will happen. When reverting, be specific about your reasons in the edit summary and use links if needed. Look at the article's edit history and its talk page to see if a discussion has begun.
I don't care what you say about your fancy London beer, Jack. As far as I'm concerned, there's no beer in the world like George's Home Brewed' (Anthony Farrar-Hockley, The Edge of the Sword, (1954) 1955 p,54) Nishidani ( talk) 12:39, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Why do you engage yourself in such a controversial topic in the most controversial way? I never understood why a man from Japan would care so much about the Palestinians. Khazar ( talk) 18:57, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
There is no such thing as "Palestine." Palestine is a racist colonialist fantasy envisioned by Arabian imperialist powers. Falsely comparing Israelis to Nazis as Nishidani just did is a vile tactic used by anti-Semites to defame Jews and deny the Holocaust. As any intelligent person not brainwashed by the Muslims would know, it is the "Palestinians" who are the Nazis. They are illegal colonist-settlers from Arabia intent on stealing the Jewish homeland to further expand their colonial Arab empire consisting of 21 different countries already. Communists like Nishidani hate Israel obviously because communism is an anti-Semitic totalitarian ideology that is basically the same as Nazism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.91.199.221 ( talk) 09:20, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
[7]-- Shrike ( talk) 22:05, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Nishidani, I have transferred the contents of this section to a new sub-page:
I've done this partly because your talk page was getting too big (again!) but also because it will be convenient for other editors to be able to refer to a separate page.
Been waiting to do this for some time, until the unbearable horrors of what US-Israeli militarism is doing in Gaza, and commentaries theron, have died down - which may never happen. Anyway, now seems as good a time as any. -- NSH001 ( talk) 11:44, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
User:CONFIQ has opened an ANI concerning you, but hasn't notified you. I'm correcting that. DeCausa ( talk) 11:59, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi, you removed this picture from 2014 Israel–Gaza conflict, and I didn't quite get the reason. Can you elaborate please ? - WarKosign ( talk) 18:50, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
See this section in the talk page archives. This was apparently uploaded from the ID flickr account, and constitutes war propaganda. There are serious doubts about its authenticity. Two editors, myself included, gave considered arguments that it looks as though it was a posed photo. Therefore, because of its provenance, because so far no one can track down where it was taken or under what circumstances, because, if it is, as it certainly looks, staged, it is laughably inept (the photographer taking the photo frontally is exposed to the same rocket fire the kid being protected, partially, is apparently exposed to. Note that there is a wall providing a background and, absurdly, the soldiers do not put themselves between the child and the wall: they are holding the boy outwards from the wall, presumably to make the fact that he is a child visible to the photographer, who is standing in the optimal position, despite a threatened rocket about to explode there, to capture the shot frontally. If you've ever protected a child from a threat, the instinct is universal: you grab him in your arms and put the threat to your back, which neither of the two soldiers is doing. Also in the discussion no editor in favour of its inclusion responded to these doubts, it should not be included until much further work is done consensually, if someone can provide the citation asked for. You don't in good practice, add 'stuff' without verifiable sources and then plaster a cit needed tag that might never produce the requested information, particularly when serious doubts exist as to the authenticity of that material. Nishidani ( talk) 19:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Your comments how it is obviously staged bothered me. As I wrote, I really found the mother's address and phone number. I did not want to bother them, however given her description how they were just entering their neighborhood I was looking for a red wall near their address on google street view and couldn't find one. Finally I understood - the wall is not red, the soldier's vests reflect red light on it.
I believe the photo was taken right behind this wall. On the photo you can see a concrete wall of a matching height, and a yellow strip that is the Plexiglas frame right bellow the dark semi-circle on top. The semi-circle on top that you said is studio light is probably the mother's hand or finger partially covering the lens. If it was light we'd still be able to see something in the corners, given it's harsh sun light (or a studio light). From here you can see sand and rubble under the wall, this is why I think they were on the other side of the wall. Either they were driving there or the kid ran to hide behind this wall after he left the car.
I would like you to re-consider your flat statement that the image is staged.
The argument that this is not the correct procedure to protect children during the attack is valid - I'm sure their main concern was calming down a frightened child, it is possible that the picture was taken after the rocket already fell. The mother wrote that the soldiers remained with them for 10 minutes after the alarm talking to the child. In this case the caption saying that the soldiers are protecting him with their bodies wasn't factually correct - solders were calming a child frightened by an attack, but I see no reason to suspect the picture is not genuine. WarKosign ( talk) 13:54, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
On a totally different subject, given your background and interests - what do you think about this theory ? WarKosign ( talk) 16:57, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Great civilizations, like great poets, thrive on theft." (and composers, not to mention many Wikipedia editors), and now "
Most people are 'lost', and the few that aren't are usually told to 'get lost'." Gold! Johnuniq ( talk) 10:10, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
The sun shone, having no alternative, on the nothing newand I am sure you won't have to Google that. Johnuniq ( talk) 11:06, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Here is a picture that was taken when the alarm was activated by accident and people thought there was a rocket attack. Reminds of you of anything ? WarKosign ( talk) 14:04, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
[8] I hope you can discern this auto-translation, looks like there is no English version of this article. WarKosign ( talk) 06:31, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rafah massacre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Maghazi. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:14, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Nishidani, I can understand you felt the need to post a comment, but please leave it at that, really. Don't put any more pennies in. Bishonen | talk 12:13, 9 October 2014 (UTC).
On 'mainstream source bias, and many links to relevant analyses that show the corruption that threatens many of our sources Stephen Walt 'Hacks and Hird Guns,' Foreign Policy 9 September 2014. Nishidani ( talk) 08:26, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Kids Behind Bars: Israel's Arbitrary Arrests of Palestinian Minors, Spiegel Online International. IjonTichy ( talk) 06:48, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
In case you missed it, I agreed that the article needs to be an analysis rather than a list of reports of the phrase. I think the PFLP quote helps a bit. I still don't know how or if I will !vote in the AfD, which I encouraged. And thanks for your support. The AfD is a bit of a clusterfuck right now. Dougweller ( talk) 16:04, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Compare
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Korean influence on Japanese culture. The long discussion about details fails to grasp the issue with the generic narrative, which is about
Nihonjinron, similar as sut/sunday has to do with dual convenant theology.
Serten (
talk)
17:50, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I've been out of the AFD game for a while -- is it common for AFDs with a pretty clear trend to delete after 7 days to wait for a few late-comers to !vote keep without actually reading the prior discussion? I'm halfway considering WP:DRV in this case, but I guess since no one other than Curtis and maybe Andrew actually objected to my assertion that virtually everything in the article needed to go one way or the other then no harm no foul.
But regarding that latter point -- I wasn't lying when I said the guy has interacted with me three times outside of my initial AFD on his Tomomitsu Taminato article (an equally dodgy "no consensus" close with a 2/3 majority in favour of deletion...), and on all three occasions he has showed up on a page he had never shown any interest in before or since and opposed my removal of blatant POV/OR. I don't wanna go to ANI and ask for an IBAN, since they tend to be two-way and that didn't work out last time I requested it, and the problem with a TBAN is that the "topic" in question is supposed to be something all Wikipedians are permanently banned from anyway...
Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 12:47, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
About the Korean influence on Japanese culture discussion -- it does seem to have been closed rather abruptly (even though I suppose it was going nowhere). I find it very difficult to understand why a bunch of people always come along, and just ignore fundamental problems with (non-)articles. Anyway, what you said about the "Coffee table Needham": of course you are right, I should have said "by Robert Temple, with a foreword by and no doube sourced from Joseph Needham". But this might be a demonstration of the same problem: what does Needham say about the Chinese and biochemistry? They discovered how to isolate things with medical effects from urine, but they knew nothing (obviously) of DNA, enzymes, and whatnot, and as far as I know were still stuck with fire, water, wood, metal, and earth to make stuff from. But to call this "anticipating modern biochemistry" seems to me to be just dishonest. Imaginatorium ( talk) 15:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
I highly recommend the series of investigative reports by Eidan Landau on the socio-economic and political impact of the I-P conflict. The website contains a series of well-researched, well-supported pieces of investigative journalism, studying the issues in great depth and breadth. The articles focus mostly on the impact of the conflict on the lives of average people, including both Palestinians and Israelis. The articles also investigate closely related issues, e.g. how Israeli companies exploit the occupation for financial profit, corruption in the Israeli government, etc.
The most recent posting is titled Slow Death in Shuja'iyya: Work by the Artist Sabah Iyad, 18 October 2014, Gaza. Translation of the sentence at the bottom of the page: According to UN figures, at least 1,473 civilians were killed by the IDF during operation "Strong Cliff," including 501 children and 257 women. More than 11 thousand people were injured. During the day of July 20, 2014, the IDF rained on Shajai'yya 7,000 shells, including 120 bombs of one ton each. 72 civilians were killed in Shaja'iyya.
Eidan Landau writes in Hebrew. You may want to use google translate (or bing translate etc). These free online translation services are not good but they are not entirely useless either, and they are constantly improving. And besides, Landau's articles often contain links to YouTube videos in English or in Hebrew with an English translation, or links to newspaper articles from around the world in English.
Best regards, IjonTichy ( talk) 23:26, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
FYI: Nishidani's rollback - 20:20, 19 October 2014 -- Igorp_lj ( talk) 23:19, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
@ User:Nishidani, please explain this your edit:
Sorry, but I do not see any base for your "Don't edit war" charge.
My edit does follow on @ user:Dr. R.R. Pickles erasing the information from ITIC with such symptomatic description as "ITIC is a propaganda source, completely untrustworthy for basic facts", so I've asked him to add his info accurately "This is your opinion only, pls add your data w/out deleting other ones"...
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 |
May I ask if you understand Latin? I am looking for a translation of this text, pp. 159-160, from 1151 CE, involving "Calandriam", which is Kalandia today. From translate.google I understand they (=the canons of the Holy Sepulchre) are leasing some land to a "Nemes Suriano", and his children and grandchildren?? Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 18:44, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Whatever any prelate of the holy church concedes to anyone by the assent of his chapter, it is necessary that this be recorded for future memory by the firm bond of writing, lest, as time passes, what had been concluded earlier by his decree, might give rise to contestations and therefore perhaps lead to repetitious quarrels. Therefore I, Amalricus prior of the Holy Sepulchre, and the whole assembly of its clergy yield over to Nemes the Syrian and to his sons and the sons of his brother Anthony the lands and vineyards which they have in Calandria, and which he and his sons and the sons of his brother Anthony might eventually acquire in the future, so that they may take possession of them under a perpetual oath, but on condition that they will faithfully hand over, every year half of the fruits of the land, namely of all of the vineyards and orchards, which they have already planted or which they shall plant in the future. And in order that our concession in the present as in future times may obtain an abiding force, we confirm the deed with the present paper and our seal. Below are the signatories. Nishidani ( talk) 20:56, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
There's a story untold on the Lehi page. Much of the time Lehi thought they were negotiating with an Italian representative they were actually talking to a British agent. It was a successful sting operation that Lehi's supporters have long sought to suppress (out of embarrassment, presumably). I don't recall what the best source is, but I'll dig it up. Zero talk 04:15, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
-- Al Ameer ( talk) 06:16, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Take a look at Talk:Bardala, Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 19:06, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
User:Yambaram:Incivility, slurs and accusations of antisemitism All that was asked, was answered, fairly, simply and neatly. Nishidani ( talk) 14:35, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
— alf laylah wa laylah ( talk) 15:37, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Anup. I was just moving by recent changes. Thought I would leave you a msg requesting you to remove {{retired|emeritus editor}} template from your talk page. Welcome back to Wikipedia. Cheers! Anup Mehra ✈ 11:59, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
you! But some people don't think so. I'll be so bold as to predict the outcome of that matter will be: "We told you so". -- Shirt58 ( talk) 13:38, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Greetings, does your (wide) field of expertise extend to Jewish Christianity? Supposed Hebrew Gospels and so forth? In ictu oculi ( talk) 15:02, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Nishidani, on the Talk-page of the Gospel of Matthew you wrote: "...the importance for some Church theologians of establishing a Hebrew precedence in an environment where both Jewish and Christians competed for converts vigorously, where rabbinic hostility to Yeshua and ecclesiastical suppression of variant traditions deleted much of the then available evidence." Can you recite any historical documents attesting to this fact? It seems more likely to me that the passages quoted by Jerome, Eusebius, Origen, Irenaeus and Epiphanius from the original Gospel of Matthew (which was written in the Aramaic language and in Hebrew characters), and which Jerome had seen in the Library of Caesarea, is proof that the original text was not tampered with. It simply did not contain the genealogical record that now appears in the canonical text of Matthew (a later interpolation). Some think that these contradictory genealogical records in Matthew and Luke were added in order to counter the claim that Jesus may have been born of illegitimate birth.
According to Epiphanius (Anacephalaiosis 13.1): "The beginning of the Gospel among them reads: It happened in the days of Herod the king of Judea (at a time when Caiaphas was high priest) that a certain John came, baptizing the baptism of conversion in the river Jordan. Of him it is said that he was from the family of Aaron the priest, the son of Zacharias and Elisabeth. And all went out to him. […] It happened that John baptized and the Pharisees went out to him and were baptized and all Jerusalem. And John was dressed in a mantle of camel's hair and a leather belt was round his waist. And his food was, it is said, wild honey, of which the taste was that of manna, like cakes in olive oil.” It is worthy to note that the style of this original Aramaic Gospel of Matthew was similar in style to an earlier MS, viz., the Aramaic Scroll of Antiochus, whose introduction is strikingly similar to the Aramaic Gospel of Matthew, as if Matthew tried to emulate the style of the former. Davidbena ( talk) 12:38, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
The problem is not to convince oneself, most of us have that fateful flaw in our characters: the problem is to convince one's peers that 'everyone is out of step but me, Johnny', to adopt my mother's ancient admonition for eccentric ideas. Pilpul's methods, however intricate, are generally not those of historical criticism and textual analysis. Formal source analysis is what you lack: I can see it in the way you marshal evidence.
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:38, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
more than one year and one month late old chap. better late than never but not if all you are going to do is pen some tired cliches lacking accents (with a weak pun as a sorry bone to chew on). i'm afraid that my grey matter is not what it used to be after firing out a couple of life projects and holding on for dear life lest i lose track of one of these celestially bound bodies whose adventures never cease to amaze me. take care and if some cells should miraculously regenerate with time, i will see you again soon. Tiamut talk 20:06, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Nishidani, I've now set up automatic archiving for this enormous talk page of yours. It will never archive the "The West Bank/Judea and Samaria Problem" section at the top of this page. Some details:
The archiving bot will not bother you with any notifications that it's done its work (none of my doing, that's just how the bot is set up). So don't be surprised when you find bits of your talk page have disappeared down the archive plug hole.
And with a bit of luck, neither of us should have to worry any more (at least, not for a few years) about archiving this page. Regards,
-- NSH001 ( talk) 12:14, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. You are correct on what you wrote in your edit summary here. But I think the wording was used for the whole part, not only that about the occupation. However, all of the points there, except for collective punishment, is undisputed. So maybe it is better to have it like it is now but change to "and what they describe as collective punishment". Any thoughts? -- IRISZOOM ( talk) 20:03, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
This is a first indeed. We did come to some good compromises, but I don't think we ever agreed on anything before. Debresser ( talk) 00:57, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Ah, Nishidani, this time I must disagree. "Reticent to" is attested in English since 1875 according to the OED:
2. Reluctant to perform a particular action; hesitant, disinclined. Chiefly with about, or to do something.
1875 Rep. Sel. Comm. Condition of South (43rd U.S. Congr. 2 Sess.) 15 The State registrar was just as reticent to give us information.
1932 Daily Capital News & Post Tribune (Jefferson City, Missouri) 14 Feb. 11 a/6 They were reticent about leaving it [sc. home].
1948 Jrnl. Amer. Folklore 61 29 Dreams, promptings of the spirit, and peep-stones have all combined to make the reticent girl give in to the proposals of a polygamous suitor.
1959 Times 8 Oct. 13 Having..informed my employer of my impending call-up, he is naturally reticent to improve my position.
2008 F. Kellerman Mercedes Coffin xxxviii. 311 She knows he'd be reticent to hire a lawyer to defend her?
It seems to have begun in America, though, but did make it into The Times by 1959. In all other aspects of the discussion we concur, of course.— alf laylah wa laylah ( talk) 17:31, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi - with this edit [1] I'm guessing that you moved material from another article but didn't put a link to that article in your edit summary (that needs to be fixed with a dummy edit to avoid copyvio). My problem is that you didn't bring over the references, so we have Brook 2009 and Brook 2010 without a clue as to what these are. I've just reverted someone who replaced one of those with a website (which at least was selling his book among others, so some relevance). Can you please fix this? Thanks. And, um, Sheba? Dougweller ( talk) 15:44, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
You may find this of interest.
In the mid-1980s, when I worked at Al-Fajr Newspaper, a friend of mine was teaching English in a village in the West Bank. She wanted to do a lesson on active and passive voice, and for this purpose she photocopied reports of the same clashes between Palestinians and Israeli forces, as published in both the Jerusalem Post and Al-Fajr English Weekly. Where the JP routinely reported that "x Palestinians were injured", "y houses were demolished", AF reported that "Israeli forces injured x Palestinians, destroyed y homes". It's a lesson her pupils never forgot!
Happy weekend. RolandR ( talk) 21:35, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
...because it could have been preached equally well on Saturday morning as on Sunday. Nicely done.— alf laylah wa laylah ( talk) 23:06, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
The Socratic Barnstar | |
For your wisdom in the analysis of the mess that was the Gilabrand AE case, and the wisdom that your comments continue to show. The Israel-Palestine area needs more editors like you. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:56, 10 March 2014 (UTC) |
"Armenians as Amalekites: Fixing an horrendous confusion of displaced sourcing, WP:OR. If you edit in anything, please follow standard principles.". This was not my work. I restored material a new editor deleted without cause or comment. The critique is meant for the prior editor that added that material. Alatari ( talk) 15:41, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
(2)'To call Dickens "Kaizanian" would be an over-statement of his considerable gift for for creating memorable characters, while to call Kaizan "Dickensian" would be a seriously misleading understatement. This richness became all the more impressive when set against the national drive towards human standardization.' ibid. p.430
To be kept close to the bottom of this page because I forget the agenda as time scurries on Nishidani ( talk) 21:00, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You participated to a discussion on that article. A brief opinion would be welcome here. Pluto2012 ( talk) 17:54, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Although you were right to remove that silly passage about Khazars being more mongoloid in a certain region, I'd like to bring your attention to this. Notice the beginning of page 4. Khazar ( talk) 23:19, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
You get endless bad reportage in mainstream newspapers. Counterpunch is not stricto sensu RS, but this article should be accepted. Nishidani ( talk) 17:32, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:31, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Nishidani! I would ask you to reconsider the comment with which you reverted my edit at [2]. I know about Aikhenvald as a linguist, but that is not even at issue here. Bibliographies about living persons are not supposed to contain any unsourced information. The entire paragraph was unsourced, so it was appropriate to delete it. And so was your revert during which you added a source. Best, G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:51, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Nishidani, I know you've spent a lot of time and said a lot on this AN/I case, but I hope you go to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed topic ban and either voice your support or opposition. From reading your statements, I think I know your position but right now, the voting could go any which way (topic ban, indefinite block, both) and since you made the original complaint, I think what you say will carry a lot of weight. As an editor who is continually and persistently reverted by Evildoer at every turn, I find myself in the peculiar position of speaking up for him, if he can work on his attitude and sourcing. Liz Read! Talk! 01:20, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
The Socratic Barnstar | |
I was meaning to thank you months ago but I forgot to. You've single handedly turned the Khazars article into one worthy of FA status. Not only is it free of edit wars now, but it's nice to be able to read one of my favorite articles without seeing it shrink or inflate with original research. :)))) Khazar ( talk) 20:08, 12 May 2014 (UTC) |
Deeply appreciated, but I couldn't have gotten it into shape alone. I might have done a fair bit of the work, but it was an environment of several posters like yourself, Laszlo, Andrew and Jeepez (I hope I've forgotten no one, but at my age . .), ready to read closely, curb edit warriors, and check that constituted the sine qua non of anything accomplished there. Teamwork by people with a critical independence can do wonders, and no one main editor should forget that debt. Cheers Nishidani ( talk) 21:11, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Nishidani, since you edit in the broad area of the Middle East, I'd welcome your opinion in the discussion on the deletion of the Semitic peoples' categories. The question about these categories seems to hinge on whether or not the editor believes Semitic is correctly applied to people or if it should be restricted to describing certain topics, like language, geography or history. Please weigh in at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 May 11#Category:People of Semitic descent. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 14:50, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
I don't want to be a headache but your experience with fringe theories are needed here. Khazar ( talk) 23:43, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
We use only mainstream newspaper sources for the I/P area updates. A half a day ago, Kerry touched on the risks Israel ran of becoming an apartheid state unless progress was made in serious peace talks. Well, in fifteen hours, Al Jazeera noted it almost immediately, as did the Jerusalem Post, The Times of Israel and Front Page Magazine; it took a mere 5 for Haaretz to note the fact; Ynet registered the news after 7 hours. The NYTs is still twiddling its thumbs, trying to work out how to spin this, on its not-yet-breaking news breaking news page. On the other hand it has the latest updates on sanctions against Russia, and was first off the block to shout that 'Egypt Sentences More Than 680 to Death'. On important I/P information, every dot and comma must be cross-checked, every stylistic nuance, every detail in the ostensible troublesome balance sheet must be calculated. In short, why bother? Nishidani ( talk) 13:58, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- "You cannot by an act of parliament strip 20% of the citizenry of their native rights,". Yes, of course. These people should keep the Israeli citizenship, but what about their newborn babies? there is a precedent of British citizens, that their newborn babies are not inheriting the British citizenship, if the baby is born overseas.(I am not familiar with the details.)
- "Baqa al-Gharbiyye is separated from its West Bank sister city, Baqa ash-Sharqiyya (or Baqa East) by the Israeli West Bank barrier which in this section coincides with the Green Line.[16 As a result, a concrete wall topped with barbed wire runs through one neighbourhood."]. Does not it make sense that the border will move such as both Baqa villages will be united within a Palestinian state? Ykantor ( talk) 20:25, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
The Guardian - Chris McGreal - Kerry wasn't wrong: Israel's future is beginning to look a lot like apartheid, 14 May 2014:
← ZScarpia 23:28, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Could any of the young whiz kids out there tell me where the New York Times reported the news that Martin Indyk might resign from his role as Special Envoy, which caused a flurry of articles all over Israel and in many foreign papers? Thanks Nishidani ( talk) 15:45, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Are there any maps uploadable for the disposition of Yishuv forces on the 13/14 May 1948 set against the Nov.30 Partition plan map? One exists, and can be viewed at 17.15 minutes into Salman Abu Sitta's lecture on the Right of Return here. His argument is that on the day of the 'Arab Invasion' , Yishuv forces were already outside the lines allocated to them. Nishidani ( talk) 19:52, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
a demonstration on Nakba Day—the anniversary of Israel’s Declaration of Independence in 1948. (Jonathan S. Tobin, 'Was Nakba Shooting Another al-Dura Libel?,' Commentary Magazine 21 May 2014.)
Date | Place | Target | Description | Action | Executor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
May 15, 2014 | Beitunia, West Bank | Nadeem Siam Nawara(17); Mohammad Mahmoud Odeh Salameh(16). A third student, Mohammed Aza, was shot through the lungs | Students | Shot dead in the back in two separate incidents (73 minutes apart) after a demonstration involving rock throwing outside Ofer Prison. | Israel Border Police. [2] [3] [4] [5] |
Nishidani ( talk) 13:31, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
It said at the top that you can only revert once every 24 hours on that page if you Edit it. You might be blocked now, you reverted twice! XD The Toon Disney Guy ( talk) 11:51, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
I asked Alison if an IP was JarlaxleArtemis and she confirmed and blocked several accounts and another IP. Dougweller ( talk) 14:08, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
The Beitunia shootings incident probably deserves its own article at some point given the coverage, although perhaps it's too soon. Anyhow, you may not have seen a more recent NYT article [3] B'Tselem seem to be keeping track of the media reports. [4] Sean.hoyland - talk 12:40, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
One can't add that to the list, despite the fact that we know who gave the order (now Brig. Gen.) Roni Numa, who, Ofir, relayed the decision to 'neutralize' a Palestinian businessman (driving in a car with his wife and brother-in-law and children), to the two snipers who then shot him dead. It's the best documented example of the genre, but is not classified yet in the targeted assassinations lists. Indeed no internet search will tell you the day the incident occurred, nor the name of the person. Of the several thousand killed so far, on my reading, several hundred would fit that description of being deliberately targeted, though not militants. But we can't do WP:OR syntheses or draw conclusions.
The other relevant point to consider is system bias. For instance, while we don't have an article for the Beitunia killings, there is already an article for an event less than three days old - 2014 kidnapping of Israeli teens (an example of the format described by Nishidani: "using a selective set of sources to underline the viviousness of Palestinians"). A prodigious output of (POV) articles covering Israeli victims of the the conflict while not covering Palestinian victims is a problem. Dlv999 ( talk) 10:49, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
FatGuySeven (
talk)
03:22, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! FatGuySeven ( talk) 16:15, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
For the record, it absolutely is him - even down to denying his identity (he also denied that he was Grawp until that was proven). He reacts instinctively - any time anyone challenges his edits, he starts making unicode-infused, empty, cowardly threats against them. As if this had ever worked. This has been going on for ten years, since he was 15, and he hasn't changed a bit. NawlinWiki ( talk) 14:43, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, regarding your comment at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement: you seem to have forgotten to sign it. Any full RfC about the matter would be flooded with socks, me thinks. Perhaps we should start finding links to all those off-wiki reports of canvassing, and then show the damage (=huge waste of time) throw-away sock do in the I/P area, and then take it to Arb.com? Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 20:35, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
I've filed a sockpuppet case at /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Smatprt. Tom Reedy ( talk) 13:36, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
Have a beer! Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 22:01, 3 July 2014 (UTC) |
Btw, one very easy task: on Umm al-Fahm Guerin writes that it has "dix huit cents" inhabitants. Isn´t that 1800? Petersen, citing Guerin, say it is 800? Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 22:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Nishidani....
Just letting you know :) user Gunrpks reported me for "reverting" his editorial wars on your article concerning the war in the middle east. I am a new user and have never reported some one before but I will try to report him as well. -- علي سمسم ( talk) 12:35, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
In any case, I would advise you not to report him, it is a bad practice, esp. by newbies, to use this. It looks like playing tactical games to out an 'adversary'. Be patience, calm, succinct, in your reply, and if you check the evidence and find you have made an error, apologize. Above all, do not transform your reply into a long screed. Trust administrators to see into it. They have better eyes than most of us, most of the time. Nishidani ( talk) 13:07, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you :)-- علي سمسم ( talk) 13:16, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. AlanS ( talk) 14:37, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
I find it chills me more than coffee! I think we can work well together, because of, more than despite, our differing POVs. I think most editors misuse or fail to grasp the positives of that dynamic, in many contentious areas. Cheers :) Irondome ( talk) 00:22, 12 July 2014 (UTC) |
But now that I see what the removed 150 odd attacks by this Nishidumbass sockster wrote, I wonder at the puerile lack of an ability to connect one's thoughts to real history. Willing death on others in order to defend one's 'ethnic vitalism' is of course a Nazi cast of mind, and therefore, ipso facto unacceptable for anyone with the genocide of WW2 still vivid in recall.
Hitler once said:’ We shall regain our health only by eliminating the Jew.' Manfred Henningsen, ‘The Politics of Purity and Exclusion,’ Björn H. Jernudd, Michael J. Shapiro (eds.), The Politics of Language Purism, Mouton de Gruyter 1989 pp.31-52 p.48 Same pathology in the sock who thinks eliminating Christians, Europeans, Arabs and wikipedia will somehow secure the survival of Israel. Even if that happened I would survive, I guess, being a pagan, and only 'European' by adoption. Then again, if wikipedia was killed off, I might just, qua Nishidani, croak with it! Nishidani ( talk) 07:34, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring Tritomex ( talk) 11:06, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 20:21, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Ho, mikado! First, is there maybe a missing "a" in the time since your retirement. Second as someone who knows something about the topic, you might maybe be interested in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity/Noticeboard#Userspace drafts. John Carter ( talk) 20:49, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:30, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Good article, [5] nableezy - 22:56, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Gazan farmers are legally forbidden to reclaim their own land unless they obtain permission from the Israeli military authorities.
Gaza expanded its trade in the late 1950s to the COMECON countries of Eastern Europe. .. Immediately after the June 1967 war, all Western markets were banned to Gazan exporters in order to preclude competition with Israeli agricultural producers and then, as now, to limit Gaza's access to foreign economic and political circles.
Restrictions on export markets also extend to the Israeli market.Presently, Gaza's farmers are prohibited from marketing most fruits and vegetables inside Israel, a measure designed to avoid competition with Israeli products. . .Certain products, such as strawberries, eggplants, and zucchini, which are not competitive with Israeli products, are allowed to enter Israel's markets through the Vegetable Marketing Board . . citrus products are also exported to Israel from Gaza for use in juice factories. Israeli producers, on the other hand, have unlimited access to Gazan markets, exporting substantial quantities of fruits and vegetables at prices with which Gazan farmers are unable to compete.
In light of the critical water problems inside Gaza, the Israeli government, through its affiliated water company, Mekorot, has issued restrictions against the digging of new wells and has limited the amount of water that Palestinian farmers may use, These same restriction on water consumption, however, do not apply to the Israeli settlements inside the Strip, which have installed 35-40 new wells in recent years, . . According to the Israeli Water Commission, in 1985 alone, Israelis living in the Gaza Strip consumed, per capita, 2,326 cubic meters of water compared to an average consumption of 123 cubic meters for every Gazan
Nishidani ( talk) 11:52, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Guess you'll be needing that again, then... Yunshui 雲 水 10:35, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
瀉水置平地
各自東西南北流
人生亦有命
安能行嘆復坐愁
酌酒以自寬
舉杯斷絕歌路難
心非木石豈無感
吞聲躑躅不敢言. Best regards, Nishidani ( talk) 11:10, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi! I think you've missed a discussion occurred at here. Please participate the discussion by presenting your ideas about the background section. Best Mhhossein ( talk) 21:39, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:32, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
I fixed this up as best I could; please note edit summary contents and hidden text. The list has issues. For one thing, the number of wounded is very hard to specify with any kind of exactitude which is what I think you are (understandably) trying to do. Also, some of the links are no longer active. Best of luck. Quis separabit? 00:45, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
User Evildoer187, has returned to Wikipedia and has violated his topic ban. This ip belongs to him and he is using it to avoid his topic ban. He states in this edit summary that it belongs to him. AcidSnow ( talk) 17:11, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
It is good to see that the article pertaining to the Gaza-Israel situation has been somewhat restrained as of late and is keeping as neutral of a view as is seemingly possible for an article like this. In the mean time, if anything gets out of hand, look at this pretty kitten!
Jab843 (
talk)
16:31, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
May I asked what I wrote that what biased and not just the inclusion of facts? Looking at your page you seem to biased and a bit antisemitic, I think I'll consult more neutral parties. -- monochrome_ monitor 10:24, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
:(5) 'he has been called antisemitic many times before. I'm just one of many to object.' Monochrome Monitor.
Nishidani ( talk) 18:41, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Take your outrage elsewhere, maybe the Electronic Intifada or Richard Fink''le''stein
Hello again. I apologize for my unfounded libeling of you as antisemitic. I only skimmed your page and decided without credence that you reverted my edit due to an ulterior motive because it was easier than actually debating it. I certainly won't vilify you again. I hope that we can both make Wikipedia a more comprehensive knowledge base while avoiding confrontation in the meantime. Thanks, (and I'll be more careful about omitting my nonfinite verbs!) -- monochrome_ monitor 00:23, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
I am mentoring MM, I decided to shortly before I left. I should have "publicised" it somehow, or told MM, but I didnt. I think if I had been around, we all could have agreed to put it away days ago. I have spoken to her, and I reproduce fully my initial email, knocked out about 2 hrs after I got home. I trust MM will not object.
Hi Georgia :)
Now listen up.
a/ I am not happy with you calling Nishi d an anti-semite. As a Jew who was 16 in 1978 allow me some advantage here. I can smell an anti-semite at 12,000 miles and no, neither he nor Sean are. I have studied N's writings through a microscope, my anti-semite detector lens. It reads zero. His writing has always been deeply respectful of the Jewish people and religion, and has explicitly and repeatedly spelled out the positive aspects of the state of Israel. He admires its democratic institutions and it's plurality, its scientific and cultural and economic achievements. He just demands from his own POV, a moralistic action-based series of measures from Israel. He is not a existential Israel rejectionist. He holds to the 2 state solution as far as I can see. The same seems to go for Sean. As for user pages, my own handle alone is provocation enough to the inexperienced ;)
b/ I advise you go to N's page and apologise. You can freely quote the contents of these mails. Then we can see what we can do about that scappy mess of a fight that I am wading through. Have you been banned in any way? It does not look like it from my scan-reading so far. I will go to N's page too if necessary. We have mutual repect. Say I was out of town as your mentor and take full responsibility. Never throw the AS charge around Georgia, unless you are DAMN sure, and you have consulted with me.
Apart from that you are doing ok. You will be intellectually roughed up sometimes, but you will grow. IMPROVE YOUR GRAMMAR. LOL
Shalom!
S
your thoughtful commentary here. I know a (very) elderly man who survived the Warsaw uprising and the concentration camps, and he wholeheartedly agrees with you. - Darouet ( talk) 19:38, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
What is it that makes you think you have to perspective to even venture such a ludicrous and overreaching comment? What is it that makes you want to demonize the Ancient Greeks and the Romans?...the ancient Greeks and Romans, and in fact even thousands of years even before the advent of these two fascist, ancient so-called 'civilizations' whose elite pretended they were 'democratic' or 'republican'
I forgot about your "to-do" list - so I've set it up near the top of this page, where you can easily find it. It will stay there and will never be archived. -- NSH001 ( talk) 05:51, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
This is an amazing decision, The decision says that "Wickey-nl is temperamentally unsuited to editing this controversial topic area", based wholly on intemperate responses on the WP:AE page. Nobody could point to any edit on article or talk pages which demonstrates this. The evidence presented by Brewcrewer was ignored completely (rightly) and most of the evidence presented by Shrike was also deemed not actionable. There was indeed the issue of bias, but who doesn't have bias in I/P area? I certainly do, and a very strong one.
The exchange on the talk page and the spat with admins was indeed wrong. But it is amazing to me that if Wickey-nl had simply made no statement at all, he would probably not have even got a sanction, except perhaps a warning. This shows me that the admins have wholly made the decision based on responses on the WP:AE page and 'social' skills rather than any edits on actual articles or their talk pages.
I wonder how someone can judge whether someone is suited to edit in an area without editing in the area, or even evaluating the content of the person's edits? Four other editors (including myself) who actually edit in ARBPIA talked about the content of the edits, and giving neutral-to-good assessment, but they were ignored. Coming on the heels of the decision to topic-ban Sean.hoyland, it makes me very sad and annoyed about the ARBPIA sanctions process. Kingsindian ( talk) 18:32, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Talk:Israelites. And the article itself. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 08:12, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
You seem to be the only one who has a considerable amount of influence regarding that page. I'm surprised how people don't understand the policies regarding WP:SYNTHESIS, WP:OR, AND WP:FRINGE. They want to mention "Levantine origins" in the same sentence as "coalesced in the Roman empire" despite the fact that there's an entire paragraph in the lead covering the former topic. Take a look for yourself. Khazar ( talk) 19:06, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
@ Nishidani: Yeah, and well, the tradition is wrong. It has been proven incorrect by DNA analysis. The Kuthim from Iraq would not have the Cohen gene, they would most likely not even be from J1a, but from J2, and if they were from J1a it would not be in the same northwest semitic cluster as the CMH. There are many areas where the tradition is wrong. I just do not think that the Israelites sat around deciding to completely make stuff up just to frustrate the efforts of future archeologists. I think that if a very specific, rather mundane, emphasis is placed in the Tanakh on something like the location of Beth Shemesh, or the northern border of Dan, I don't think they would go out of their way, or even have any incentive, to make nonsense up. For one, the people reading it at the time would have said, wait a second, this is incorrect the border of Dan is not over here. It would discredit the Tanakh in the eyes of the people. Even if you assume the entire Tanakh was written in 400 BCE by Ezra, the people living at the time would have a cultural memory of the borders of their land, their lineages, what distinguished them from other ethnic groups, who their actual kings were, et cetera. It used to be assumed there was no real difference in lineage between Celtic and Germanic nations, now because of DNA testing we know they are founded by two totally different haplogroups, one form R and the other from I. The lineage of the Israelites from a man who lived in the late bronze age, and immigrated to Canaan from the Aramaeans in Syria, I think is most likely true, I don't know, but why would anyone make up a story so specific, that is not even very epic? I mean, if you are going to make up a false origin, why not do it like the Romans or Greeks and claim you were founded by gods who fought some mythological beast, why the idiosyncratic and boring origin of an Aramaean traveler?-- Newmancbn ( talk) 18:49, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, unless my bifocals are acting up, I think the header title for the "Day 12 Saturday 19 July" chart is duplicated. I tried to fix by tweaking but couldn't. Quis separabit? 13:53, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
I said parts of the text were POV, I didn't say there weren't legitimate comments in there. However, is there were many POV comments in there it is proper to revert it and allow the user who posted it to fix it and put it back. You now just put back POV comments, as I had clearly explained was the reason I did it. I suggest you either fix up his POV comments or undue your revert. - Galatz ( talk) 15:23, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
The conflagration caused heavy casualties on both sides and was described by Col. Lee as "artillery Hell."[21] Seeing the glint of Confederate bayonets concealed in the Cornfield, Hooker halted his infantry and brought up four batteries of artillery, which fired shell and canister over the heads of the Federal infantry, covering the field. All at once, the cornfield exploded into chaos as a savage battle raged through the area. Men beat each other over the head with rifle butts and stabbed each other with bayonets. Officers rode around on their horses swearing and cursing and yelling orders no one could hear in the noise. Rifles became hot and fouled from too much firing. The air was filled with a hail of bullets and shells.
Lt. Col. Joseph S. Fullerton wrote, "Kennesaw smoked and blazed with fire, a volcano as grand as Etna." Battle of Kennesaw Mountain
Regarding your edit here. I had earlier included it in the section below, though in a condensed form. So might be just duplication. Kingsindian ( talk) 22:04, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
B'Tselem has documented 59 incidents of bombing and shelling, in which 458 people have been killed. [1]
B'tselem has compiled an infogram listing families killed at home in 72 incidents of bombing or shelling, comprising 547 people killed, of whom 125 were women under 60, 250 were minors, and 29 were over 60.(should read:'According to B'tselem's infogram of 72 bombing/shelling incidents involving 547 people among families killed at home, 125 were women under 60, 250 were minors, and 29 were over 60.') [2]
Not necessarily your cup of tea I know but if you wanted to subject yourself to being involved here it would be appreciated as you are probably one of our better informed people in general. John Carter ( talk) 18:18, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
DRN discussion on Hamas rockets. TheTimesAreAChanging ( talk) 03:11, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Very decent of you, after me not always behaving in the most civil manner. WarKosign ( talk) 08:30, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi. You forgot to add your signature here. -- IRISZOOM ( talk) 14:06, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive265#Move War at History of the Jews in Nepal, and RFC review that concerns you because you were recently involved with one or more of the related Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of the Jews in Nepal, Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 June 30 ( History of the Jews in Nepal), Talk:History of the Jews in Nepal#RfC: Should we change article name to 'Judaism in Nepal'?. Thank you, IZAK ( talk) 09:06, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Is there a source to "many of which have resulted in mass civilian deaths" [6]?. MarciulionisHOF ( talk) 14:56, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Consider reverting only when necessary. BRD does not encourage reverting, but recognises that reverts will happen. When reverting, be specific about your reasons in the edit summary and use links if needed. Look at the article's edit history and its talk page to see if a discussion has begun.
I don't care what you say about your fancy London beer, Jack. As far as I'm concerned, there's no beer in the world like George's Home Brewed' (Anthony Farrar-Hockley, The Edge of the Sword, (1954) 1955 p,54) Nishidani ( talk) 12:39, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Why do you engage yourself in such a controversial topic in the most controversial way? I never understood why a man from Japan would care so much about the Palestinians. Khazar ( talk) 18:57, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
There is no such thing as "Palestine." Palestine is a racist colonialist fantasy envisioned by Arabian imperialist powers. Falsely comparing Israelis to Nazis as Nishidani just did is a vile tactic used by anti-Semites to defame Jews and deny the Holocaust. As any intelligent person not brainwashed by the Muslims would know, it is the "Palestinians" who are the Nazis. They are illegal colonist-settlers from Arabia intent on stealing the Jewish homeland to further expand their colonial Arab empire consisting of 21 different countries already. Communists like Nishidani hate Israel obviously because communism is an anti-Semitic totalitarian ideology that is basically the same as Nazism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.91.199.221 ( talk) 09:20, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
[7]-- Shrike ( talk) 22:05, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Nishidani, I have transferred the contents of this section to a new sub-page:
I've done this partly because your talk page was getting too big (again!) but also because it will be convenient for other editors to be able to refer to a separate page.
Been waiting to do this for some time, until the unbearable horrors of what US-Israeli militarism is doing in Gaza, and commentaries theron, have died down - which may never happen. Anyway, now seems as good a time as any. -- NSH001 ( talk) 11:44, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
User:CONFIQ has opened an ANI concerning you, but hasn't notified you. I'm correcting that. DeCausa ( talk) 11:59, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi, you removed this picture from 2014 Israel–Gaza conflict, and I didn't quite get the reason. Can you elaborate please ? - WarKosign ( talk) 18:50, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
See this section in the talk page archives. This was apparently uploaded from the ID flickr account, and constitutes war propaganda. There are serious doubts about its authenticity. Two editors, myself included, gave considered arguments that it looks as though it was a posed photo. Therefore, because of its provenance, because so far no one can track down where it was taken or under what circumstances, because, if it is, as it certainly looks, staged, it is laughably inept (the photographer taking the photo frontally is exposed to the same rocket fire the kid being protected, partially, is apparently exposed to. Note that there is a wall providing a background and, absurdly, the soldiers do not put themselves between the child and the wall: they are holding the boy outwards from the wall, presumably to make the fact that he is a child visible to the photographer, who is standing in the optimal position, despite a threatened rocket about to explode there, to capture the shot frontally. If you've ever protected a child from a threat, the instinct is universal: you grab him in your arms and put the threat to your back, which neither of the two soldiers is doing. Also in the discussion no editor in favour of its inclusion responded to these doubts, it should not be included until much further work is done consensually, if someone can provide the citation asked for. You don't in good practice, add 'stuff' without verifiable sources and then plaster a cit needed tag that might never produce the requested information, particularly when serious doubts exist as to the authenticity of that material. Nishidani ( talk) 19:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Your comments how it is obviously staged bothered me. As I wrote, I really found the mother's address and phone number. I did not want to bother them, however given her description how they were just entering their neighborhood I was looking for a red wall near their address on google street view and couldn't find one. Finally I understood - the wall is not red, the soldier's vests reflect red light on it.
I believe the photo was taken right behind this wall. On the photo you can see a concrete wall of a matching height, and a yellow strip that is the Plexiglas frame right bellow the dark semi-circle on top. The semi-circle on top that you said is studio light is probably the mother's hand or finger partially covering the lens. If it was light we'd still be able to see something in the corners, given it's harsh sun light (or a studio light). From here you can see sand and rubble under the wall, this is why I think they were on the other side of the wall. Either they were driving there or the kid ran to hide behind this wall after he left the car.
I would like you to re-consider your flat statement that the image is staged.
The argument that this is not the correct procedure to protect children during the attack is valid - I'm sure their main concern was calming down a frightened child, it is possible that the picture was taken after the rocket already fell. The mother wrote that the soldiers remained with them for 10 minutes after the alarm talking to the child. In this case the caption saying that the soldiers are protecting him with their bodies wasn't factually correct - solders were calming a child frightened by an attack, but I see no reason to suspect the picture is not genuine. WarKosign ( talk) 13:54, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
On a totally different subject, given your background and interests - what do you think about this theory ? WarKosign ( talk) 16:57, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Great civilizations, like great poets, thrive on theft." (and composers, not to mention many Wikipedia editors), and now "
Most people are 'lost', and the few that aren't are usually told to 'get lost'." Gold! Johnuniq ( talk) 10:10, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
The sun shone, having no alternative, on the nothing newand I am sure you won't have to Google that. Johnuniq ( talk) 11:06, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Here is a picture that was taken when the alarm was activated by accident and people thought there was a rocket attack. Reminds of you of anything ? WarKosign ( talk) 14:04, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
[8] I hope you can discern this auto-translation, looks like there is no English version of this article. WarKosign ( talk) 06:31, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rafah massacre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Maghazi. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:14, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Nishidani, I can understand you felt the need to post a comment, but please leave it at that, really. Don't put any more pennies in. Bishonen | talk 12:13, 9 October 2014 (UTC).
On 'mainstream source bias, and many links to relevant analyses that show the corruption that threatens many of our sources Stephen Walt 'Hacks and Hird Guns,' Foreign Policy 9 September 2014. Nishidani ( talk) 08:26, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Kids Behind Bars: Israel's Arbitrary Arrests of Palestinian Minors, Spiegel Online International. IjonTichy ( talk) 06:48, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
In case you missed it, I agreed that the article needs to be an analysis rather than a list of reports of the phrase. I think the PFLP quote helps a bit. I still don't know how or if I will !vote in the AfD, which I encouraged. And thanks for your support. The AfD is a bit of a clusterfuck right now. Dougweller ( talk) 16:04, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Compare
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Korean influence on Japanese culture. The long discussion about details fails to grasp the issue with the generic narrative, which is about
Nihonjinron, similar as sut/sunday has to do with dual convenant theology.
Serten (
talk)
17:50, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I've been out of the AFD game for a while -- is it common for AFDs with a pretty clear trend to delete after 7 days to wait for a few late-comers to !vote keep without actually reading the prior discussion? I'm halfway considering WP:DRV in this case, but I guess since no one other than Curtis and maybe Andrew actually objected to my assertion that virtually everything in the article needed to go one way or the other then no harm no foul.
But regarding that latter point -- I wasn't lying when I said the guy has interacted with me three times outside of my initial AFD on his Tomomitsu Taminato article (an equally dodgy "no consensus" close with a 2/3 majority in favour of deletion...), and on all three occasions he has showed up on a page he had never shown any interest in before or since and opposed my removal of blatant POV/OR. I don't wanna go to ANI and ask for an IBAN, since they tend to be two-way and that didn't work out last time I requested it, and the problem with a TBAN is that the "topic" in question is supposed to be something all Wikipedians are permanently banned from anyway...
Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 12:47, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
About the Korean influence on Japanese culture discussion -- it does seem to have been closed rather abruptly (even though I suppose it was going nowhere). I find it very difficult to understand why a bunch of people always come along, and just ignore fundamental problems with (non-)articles. Anyway, what you said about the "Coffee table Needham": of course you are right, I should have said "by Robert Temple, with a foreword by and no doube sourced from Joseph Needham". But this might be a demonstration of the same problem: what does Needham say about the Chinese and biochemistry? They discovered how to isolate things with medical effects from urine, but they knew nothing (obviously) of DNA, enzymes, and whatnot, and as far as I know were still stuck with fire, water, wood, metal, and earth to make stuff from. But to call this "anticipating modern biochemistry" seems to me to be just dishonest. Imaginatorium ( talk) 15:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
I highly recommend the series of investigative reports by Eidan Landau on the socio-economic and political impact of the I-P conflict. The website contains a series of well-researched, well-supported pieces of investigative journalism, studying the issues in great depth and breadth. The articles focus mostly on the impact of the conflict on the lives of average people, including both Palestinians and Israelis. The articles also investigate closely related issues, e.g. how Israeli companies exploit the occupation for financial profit, corruption in the Israeli government, etc.
The most recent posting is titled Slow Death in Shuja'iyya: Work by the Artist Sabah Iyad, 18 October 2014, Gaza. Translation of the sentence at the bottom of the page: According to UN figures, at least 1,473 civilians were killed by the IDF during operation "Strong Cliff," including 501 children and 257 women. More than 11 thousand people were injured. During the day of July 20, 2014, the IDF rained on Shajai'yya 7,000 shells, including 120 bombs of one ton each. 72 civilians were killed in Shaja'iyya.
Eidan Landau writes in Hebrew. You may want to use google translate (or bing translate etc). These free online translation services are not good but they are not entirely useless either, and they are constantly improving. And besides, Landau's articles often contain links to YouTube videos in English or in Hebrew with an English translation, or links to newspaper articles from around the world in English.
Best regards, IjonTichy ( talk) 23:26, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
FYI: Nishidani's rollback - 20:20, 19 October 2014 -- Igorp_lj ( talk) 23:19, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
@ User:Nishidani, please explain this your edit:
Sorry, but I do not see any base for your "Don't edit war" charge.
My edit does follow on @ user:Dr. R.R. Pickles erasing the information from ITIC with such symptomatic description as "ITIC is a propaganda source, completely untrustworthy for basic facts", so I've asked him to add his info accurately "This is your opinion only, pls add your data w/out deleting other ones"...