Thanks for uploading Image:Patria.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 19:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:Harovbomb33jy.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 05:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello Zero0000, I am glad you contribute so much to wikipedia, but don't you think refering to the Lehi as a Zionist terrorist group is a little radical? I am well aware of the Lehi's history and actions, but terrorist group sounds a tad far-fetched to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.90.125.101 ( talk) 19:05, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:PeelReport291.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Magog the Ogre ( talk) 06:45, 4 January 2009 (UTC) -- Magog the Ogre ( talk) 06:45, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Stern-stamp.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 02:08, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Great to see your footprints around here again. Especially since the recent Judea-Samaria arbcom indefinitely topic-banned many knowledgeable people. John Z ( talk) 16:28, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! Not sure how long I'll last, I have less free time than ever. Zero talk 00:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
You removed a source here [ [1]]. could you explain your edit summary? it's not my unsourced opinion. - Yosef.Raziel ( talk) 12:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Oopsh, thanks. I will correct it as I come across it. Regards, Huldra ( talk) 21:27, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Added references, exact page numbers will have to wait (too busy), but anyone with access to the book should be able to find the relevant information easily because the entries in the book appear in a chronological order. One attack is still missing citation, it was added by you originally, perhaps your edit summary can give a hint as to where to find an Irgun acknowledgment.-- Doron ( talk) 07:35, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Zero! Sry, no insult intended, but I reverted your repeated posting of that sentence in Convoy of 35. Like I wrote several times now, it makes no sense to the uninformed reader. Would you pls rephrase it in a way that readers who haven't read the source understand what you want to say? See the discussion page of the article! Thank you. Gray62 ( talk) 17:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Done You may want to check to see that I've done this correctly. I would have made it an indef., but was afraid that being an IP vs. a registered user - that might be extreme, especially as there was a clean block log. Cheers, and have a good day. ;) —
Ched :
? 12:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Zero0000_reported_by_User:LoverOfTheRussianQueen_.28Result:_.29 nableezy - 16:24, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Hey Zero just saw you started editing again. I don't edit much now but its still good to know some of the other old guys are. On a side not I was sure you had died or something since your last edit two years ago mentioned that you were going overseas for a few days.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 04:21, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
For dealing with that so quickly. I'm not even going to bother responding, since I have a feeling the whole exercise is just a way of diluting energies and trying to get a rise of people. Long ago, I might have taken the bait. But I have learned a lot over the past couple of years here. Anyway, thanks for being on the ball. Tiamut talk 12:18, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Zero - can I mark Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Warm_as_ice_request_admin_action as resolved for now - in the knowledge that a final warning has been delivered?-- VirtualSteve need admin support? 12:34, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I´m sort of trying to clean up the depop-1948-villages. I see that you have edited the Abu Shusha-article. Now, there were at least two Abu Shusha-villages; in the Districts of Ramlah and in the District of Haifa (plus there was a "Ghuwayr Abu Shusha" in District of Tiberias).
Presently, it looks as if some of the stuff now in the Abu Shusha (Ramleh)..should be in a -not yet written- Abu Shusha (Haifa)-article. Would you care to take a look? Thanks, Huldra ( talk) 06:56, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
You contributed to a past discussion about the term "Ultra-Orthodox" on the Haredi Judaism page. I removed the content in Haredi Judaism that claimed that "Ultra-Orthodox" is pejorative. I have explained my reasons on the talk page. -shirulashem (talk) 15:31, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
With all due respect, please try to keep comments civil. I assume it was not your intention, but I take a comment like "Neither of your (Shirulashem and Lisa) positions are good enough" to be uncivil and condescending. Please take a look at the dispute resolution policies and, in particular, the policy to keep your comments focused on content. -shirulashem (talk) 13:54, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Though I see it was a few months ago, just noticed now as I'm not that active in Israeli-Palestine articles as before. Not sure if you're aware or not of some good news, but if not, in your absence one of the biggest thorns in many of our sides was finally kicked to the curb. Tarc ( talk) 23:38, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing at Efraim Karsh. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Mr. Hicks The III ( talk) 11:15, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
The reviews of Karsh's book are NOT from an "anonymous unsourced" source. The page is linked to on Karsh's university website. He is the head of the ME program at Kings College London, a prestigious university. If the reviews were not authentic, he obviously would be in massive trouble. Stop the edit war. Of course Karsh puts positive reviews on his page at his school. Tallicfan20 ( talk) 04:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
As I guess according to your name at 'DeirYassinWiki.jpg' map what I've found here there was such Wiki's file. Can you please add details about what happened with it? Thanks, - Igorp_lj ( talk) 22:06, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
no, you're not gonna get me banned. I don't push POV. If you actually read what morris said in the article, he refers to Plan D, which is what Ramla and Lydda were all about, which as you know, the purpose of which was to secure the route. Ok I should have quoted more carefully but this reason for the expulsions as given is well known. I am not POV pushing. You are the one who does that deleting anything you don't like, deleting sourced material and calling it "lies" like you did on the causes of exodus page and with the Palestine Studies citation even when you cannot prove it is wrong. Not everything cited in Peters is a "lie." Unless of course then others can delete things cited in pappe, who is more "discredited." You cannot prove I didn't consult the source from JPS I cited either. But then again, I could easily accuse you of citing things that you haven't read. This is a two-way street tho. And you delete things like you did with the Issa quote because you don't want to see them. You're also the one who kept deleting sourced and quoted material from Efraim Karsh's page. Tallicfan20 ( talk) 05:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Editing the article Fatah subsection on 6th Fatah Assembly
The section on the reference to "Little Eichmann's" adds value to the Eichmann article and is entirely pertinent to scholastic research of the analysis of Eichmann's life; although details of Ward Churchill's story are a digression and not pertinent. Churchill's reference has not only become a modern colloquialism, it is based on Arendt's analysis of Eichmann's life. ZERO0000's basis to remove this sub-section as "not pertinent in its entirety" is censorship which expresses his/her POV. Removing extraneous information about Churchill's story should not be considered censorship, neither should demoting the sub-section to another paragraph in the Analysis section (i.e. removing the header). In conclusion, just because an editor doesn't like Ward Churchill's reference doesn't mean everybody reading about the analysis of Eichmann's life should be deprived of this valuable cross-reference. Tenna ( talk) 10:05, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Tenna
Tenna ( talk) 10:05, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Tenna
Zero - we can agree to compromise if you insist on demoting this sub-section by either folding it into the Analysis section or adding a link in the More section.-- Tenna ( talk) 10:16, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Please review WP:BLP; properly sourced criticism is NOT a BLP violation, and there has been discussion on the talk page at Talk:Rashid_Khalidi#Plagiarism_claim about how to best handle this, and these TWO SENTENCES were considered appropriate by all editors. Please respect wikipedia's policies. Using BLP to improperly remove properly sourced edits is a form of disruptive editing. -- Avi ( talk) 02:50, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. I may very well be wrong, which is why we have talk pages, WT:BLP, and RfC's just to name a few methods. This has been discussed on the talk page, and is being done again there. Let us see if a new consensus emerges. -- Avi ( talk) 04:20, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Zero0000. I'm not exactly sure I understand you though. Do you have the ability to delete articles? Or do you mean you'll nominate them for speedy deletion? -- Al Ameer son ( talk) 04:32, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Yeah somebody added it to the infobox and it went undetected before. Scary really. Lucky I found it! Dr. Blofeld White cat 13:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:PP26Jul1938.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot ( talk) 10:42, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm glad you noted that this is pathetically ill-informed.
I have several times, in the archives, suggested an improvement to the etymology section, which is both ignorant and POV. I laid out a provisory draft before my perma-ban. It ain't much chop, since it simplifies a complex issue, but it does fulfil the minimal requirements, which the section at the moment does not, for writing to encyclopedic levels. A corresponding edit is required to fix Names of Jerusalem, which is organized on a false and misleading chronology that prioritizes later infra-hebraic etymologies over the historically earlier, more broadly semitic hypotheses related to the Egyptian evidence, and comparative cultic theonyms in Ugaritic and Akkadian.
You can find my last suggestion here. I think you yourself did something similar back in 2006?
Regards Nishidani ( talk) 09:16, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
I have again reverted your edit; per WP:BRD we now discuss this matter until consensus is changed or reaffirmed. Reverting past the first time, and knowingly against consensus, is a violation of WP:Edit war and may attract warnings and possibly sanctions. Of course I shall not be the party to do either, and this is only a notice that I suggest the matter is discussed with other editors before another revert takes place. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 14:31, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello Zero0000. A concern has been raised at the BLP noticeboard about talk page comments you have made regarding living persons, specifically this.
The subject is indeed a living person and you use a term that is an unsubstantiated slur. As admins, with significant editing experience, its very important we strictly adhere to WP:BLP, which is perhaps our most important policy. Could I recommend you review Wikipedia:BLP#Non-article space and refactor that comment? I think you could make the same point without resorting to potentially libelous language. Thanks (and feel free to remove this note after consideration). Rockpocke t 06:14, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
There is some new info from the State Department Digest of International Law on my talk page [ here] harlan ( talk) 09:25, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
I think certain currents of Islam have developed strong antisemitic doctrines, and think that should be documented in an article 'The rise of antisemitism in modern Islam. I note that the intensity of wiki pages dealing with this simply has no parallel in the Christianity and antisemitism articles. A lengthy list of vitriolic antisemitism spewing out from the lips of, to name but one Christian denomination, Catholic priests or eminent Catholics (or Anglo-Catholics like T.S. Eliot, vide Christopher Ricks' book and the ensuing polemics) could be, in MEMRI fashion, run up and pasted into a wiki page, and that this is not done because making such pages would be considered politically counterproductive for one nation's interests. Thus, to name just a scant few candidates.
You could, in a hour's reading, run up a similar list of statement of West Bank rabbis (Reuven Firestone speaks of 200) who have publicly come out, on various occasions, with violent abuse about Palestines as Amalekites, in halakhic law, people to be exterminated. (In fact I have one, but I wouldn't make a wiki article out of it) This is why such articles require intelligent non-partisan care. They are framed egregiously to press a political point, and only underscore how, in that area, systemic bias is operating. Regards Nishidani ( talk) 17:30, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
I almost daren't look at it. I think it may have started with material that was moved from elsewhere, and then I got fed up with it. Feel free (at least as far as I'm concerned) to put anything useful something else and redirect it, if you think it best. SlimVirgin talk| contribs 18:42, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Zero0000! A couple things:
Cheers, — Ynhockey ( Talk) 11:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Like an idiot, I left the following for you yesterday on the wrong talk page. [3] Then when you left a comment on the article talk page, I though that meant you were responding to my post, which I then couldn't find when I looked for it this morning. I briefly thought I was going mad, then realized the mistake I'd made. :) So, anyway, here is the request again (and feel free to ignore it completely if you're too busy):
Heyo Zero,
I was serious when I asked you to refactor your comment on Levy and asking you yo tone it down (e.g. descriptives like "wild fanatic"
[4] are innapproriate). Please respond to this request.
Warm regards,
Jaakobou
Chalk Talk 11:18, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Someone who has been here as long as you should know that, you plank. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 15:32, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Don't know it myself, and two people I've asked don't know it either. Its a weird transliteration - neither the right Hebrew one, nor the Hebraized Arabic into English one (which would be Urshalim). Sorry I can't be of more help. Tiamut talk 18:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Zero0000! I noticed that you added this as a source, which implies that you have access to the surveys. Since they are public domain, would it be too much to ask of you to scan or otherwise publish it? These materials are fairly hard to come by these days, but offer amazing insight into Ottoman Palestine, especially in terms of maps. Cheers, Ynhockey ( Talk) 12:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Please discuss the issue and raise your points on the article talk page before you delete my edits in that section. Thanks John Hyams ( talk) 19:05, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I just started Wikipedia:WikiProject Palestine/Sheikh Bureik..just for collecting information. That the land was owned by the Sursuk-family in 1881 probably explains why the village is not mentioned later in the Mandate-period; I assume the land was sold (with the rest of the Sursuk-land) to the Zionist-organisation, like in the Jezreel Valley, and the Arab tenants had to leave.
If you could add any 1596-data, it would be great. Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 23:12, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
On another note; I´m no good at fixing photos, but I think that most of the surroundings should be cut out of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sheikh_Abreik_Grave_in_Kiryat_Tiv'on,_Israel.jpg .....all those gray bushes aren´t really *that* interesting, methinks. And the other picture ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Zaid12.JPG) gives a better/larger view of the surroundings...so I think we should keep that as it is. What do you think? -- Huldra ( talk) 00:32, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
About categories: I guess at the moment we could use
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Villages_depopulated_prior_to_the_1948_Arab–Israeli_War; I see that the villages depopulated in 1967, like
Imwas and
Yalo, use the "Villages depopulated after the 1948 Arab–Israeli War"-category. Eventually, I guess we should/could have a special category/template for these very early depopulated villages; but just now I´m not jumping up and down with enthusiasm at the prospect. (I´m still frantically trying to get my head above the water on the 1948-villages......)
Also; Thanks for the map; I haven´t looked much, but I wasn´t able to find Sheikh Bureik?
Also; the Beit She'arim National Park-article is not very good, at present, to put it mildly. Just to start with the article it refers to, from 2005, The Jewish Magazine: Bet Shearim:
Ok, I think it is about time to finish
Wikipedia:WikiProject Palestine/Sheikh Bureik, and move it into main-space? (At least before we start *the other* "Sheik Abreik"!) You said you could fix the top picture, and take away the gray? And perhaps we could try to make it a DYK? Cheers,
Huldra (
talk) 12:55, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Your editing of Al-Haram, Jaffa made the article much brighter (That's something I can't say about other useres who erased all the information that wasn't suitable for their agenda). All the best, -- Etai han ( talk) 12:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
I have just started collecting them here [5], whenever I come across one. It is not easy to find information on them, (say, Jida is basically just a redir.) Cheers, Huldra ( talk)
Thank you for uploading File:PP14Dec1947.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Skier Dude ( talk) 02:15, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:PP1Oct1939.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk) 02:15, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Zero0000. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have an interest in adding your comments. The thread is User:Ludvikus revisited. Thank you. -- Ludvikus ( talk) 19:05, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
It's important to keep up with the latest scholarship. The article by the above world-class PSM scholar is available online and can be downloaded as a PDF file from this link: Hagemeister, Michael: "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion: PSM - Hagemeister 35 (1103)". Retrieved 2009-09-27. It questions the novelty of the finding reported in the French press. -- Ludvikus ( talk) 01:45, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, i totally agree with what you did in the article, but i don't understand as to why you feel that Tsvi Misinai is unqualified to be quoted as an expert in this field. Even though he lacks academic credentials, he is still a reputed researcher. He is a notable person. His notability is derived from his research on this subject. There are plenty of reputed media sources mentioning him and his work. Even David Ben-Gurion and Yitzhak Ben Zvi lacked academic credentials and they are still quoted. So, if their views can be mentioned, then Misinai's views on this subject should be mentioned, as an assertion, not as a fact. Santiago Matamoros 12:42, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/al-Bassa/index.html
Is THIS how "things are done" in Wikipedia?
Find a blatantly Anti-Zionist, Anti-Semitic site and just Copy & paste?
If THIS is how "things are done" in Wikipedia, please ban me. I wish to have no part in this. AbdulHornochsmannn ( talk) 05:37, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
It says I need an account to access the inside. I will sign up and let you now if I have better luck then. Thanks for everything by the way. Tiamut talk 13:45, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
I am trying to figure out if Jubbata is one and the same place as Jubata ez-Zeit. I've left some links on the talk page that may be of help in ascertaining their locations. Unfortunately, its all Greek to me. I've never been very good at coordinates and the like. Could you take a look and offer your opinion on the matter? Thanks. Tiamut talk 08:16, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, since the Morris-stuff keeps growing; I´ve moved everything about Morris &/or Khalidi to : Huldra/Morris & Khalidi. You are very much welcome with your comments there. (I´m trying to map the relationship between the villages given in Morris &/or Khalidi... eventually also in the: Esber, Rosemarie M. (2008), Under the Cover of War, The Zionist Expulsions of the Palestinians. Arabicus Books & Media. ISBN 0981513174, 9780981513171. -book. ----although the Esber -book I have at the moment has some absolutely horrible printing-errors. Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 09:02, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Have you noticed Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Arutz Sheva? Thought I saw you say some (negative) things about it somewhere and so might want to add an informed comment. John Z ( talk) 11:32, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Very well, no harm in discussing it.
Can someone please explain to me how a "Miltary Assault" is an entirely separate cause for the depopulation than an outright "Expulsion"? The population was there, and then they left. Why did they leave? According to one source it was because they were expelled by Jews. Fine. How did these Jews manage to gain sufficient control of the village to carry through this expulsion? Military Assault. You can't expell people from a place if you don't control that place. All we're talking about here are two separate stages of one alleged cause.
Q: What was the cause of the Holocaust? A: There was no single cause. Indeed there were seventeen:
Cause 1) The rise of National Socialism in Germany; Cause 2) Adolph Hitler's election to Chancellor in 1933; Cause 3) Adolph Hitler's possession of racial theories classifying Jews as subhuman; Cause 4) The implementation of Adolph Hitler's racial theories classifying Jews as subhuman; Cause 5) The construction of Death Camps. Cause 6) The construction of Gas Chambers. Cause 7) The herding of Jews into those Gas Chambers; Cause 8) The introction of the deadly gas "Zyklon B" into those Gas Cambers; Cause 9) The deadly reaction of the Jews to the introduction of Zyklon B into Gas Chambers they happened to have been located in. Cause 10) The cremation of those Jews killed by Zyklon B. Cause 12) Hyper-inflation. Cause 13) The harshness of the Treaty of Versailles. Cause 14) German bitterness over the harshness of the Treaty of Versailles. Cause 15) Mohammad Amin al-Husayni's alliance with Hitler. Cause 16) Al-Husayani's extreme inhospitality in that he refused to so much as allow Jews the most temporary of assylums in Palestine, even if only to save another human's life and kick him out once the war is over. Cause 17) The German need for soap.
But there aren't 17 causes. There is but one: Jew-Hatred.
What would actually be of some USE would be to offer ALTERNATIVE explanations, such as those of Eminent Historian Cecil Roth:
"At the outset the Arab authorities had made it known that any person remaining in the areas controlled by the Jews would be regarded as acquiescing in their political pretentions and would have to answer for it. Thus, with the outbreak of hostilities there took place a wholesale evacuation in preparation for a triumphant return." 70.25.46.99 ( talk) 00:15, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Apparently I did a crime, but I did my time. Yet you've just blocked my acount once again, from alleged transgressions that had occurred PRIOR to my first block.
Look, I did my time. You can't block me again unless I've either recidivised, or warranted a new block for new reasons. You can't punish me from the same crime more than once. That's double jeopardy. 70.25.46.99 ( talk) 00:37, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I agree with you; the present template should be improved. Personally I´m absolutely no good in fixing such technical things, though. Anyway, I have started a discussion over at Template_talk:Infobox_former_Arab_villages_in_Palestine#Improvements_to_the_template, Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 07:20, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
thank you for add source that help prove israelis destroy villages. we must not let pro israel editors water down article title so that it more pleasing to them! the truth be truth. Ani medjool ( talk) 00:41, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Zero!
Since you're one of the few good editors left, could you have a look at West Bank? Seems like a bunch of anti-occupationalists have been having a go at it.
Cheers, pedrito - talk - 17:59 22.11.2009
I'm not trying to interfere, but look again at List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus - the Google book displays incorrectly, it's actually showing p.177 and not p.76-77. I know because I have the book and couldn't find it, but the error in Google is obvious if you open the page at the hyper-link in the article. 86.160.21.92 ( talk) 16:08, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
We regret to inform you that we have no intention of "kindly go[ing] away", and allowing you, and those like you, to continue to deliberately distort history. Our friend "Abdul" has created an OFF-Wikipedia group growing in number day by day. Our group may be a mere 145 strong, but our numbers are growing daily. To-date, only three of us have spoken. One, our founder, from an IP address in Canada, a second from the US, and a third, from, of all places, Saudi Arabia, a mere hour after the second made his post. This is not sockpuppetry. There exists no means of transportation that can transport the same individual from The United States to Saudi Arabia within one hour's time. Within the next several days, please expect to hear from a fourth member, in this instance a certain gentleman writing from an IP address in England, voicing his own personal objection to your deliberate distortion of history. No. We will certainly not "kindly go away". We are here to stay. We are here to fix Wikipedia. No doubt you will delete this post too due to its flagrant violation of WP:CEUWGAPH. Yet we will continue. Unless and until Wikipedia is fixed, we will never "kindly go away". 174.89.234.46 ( talk) 00:15, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Jaffa1953B.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk) 05:44, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Patria.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 19:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:Harovbomb33jy.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 05:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello Zero0000, I am glad you contribute so much to wikipedia, but don't you think refering to the Lehi as a Zionist terrorist group is a little radical? I am well aware of the Lehi's history and actions, but terrorist group sounds a tad far-fetched to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.90.125.101 ( talk) 19:05, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:PeelReport291.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Magog the Ogre ( talk) 06:45, 4 January 2009 (UTC) -- Magog the Ogre ( talk) 06:45, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Stern-stamp.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 02:08, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Great to see your footprints around here again. Especially since the recent Judea-Samaria arbcom indefinitely topic-banned many knowledgeable people. John Z ( talk) 16:28, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! Not sure how long I'll last, I have less free time than ever. Zero talk 00:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
You removed a source here [ [1]]. could you explain your edit summary? it's not my unsourced opinion. - Yosef.Raziel ( talk) 12:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Oopsh, thanks. I will correct it as I come across it. Regards, Huldra ( talk) 21:27, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Added references, exact page numbers will have to wait (too busy), but anyone with access to the book should be able to find the relevant information easily because the entries in the book appear in a chronological order. One attack is still missing citation, it was added by you originally, perhaps your edit summary can give a hint as to where to find an Irgun acknowledgment.-- Doron ( talk) 07:35, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Zero! Sry, no insult intended, but I reverted your repeated posting of that sentence in Convoy of 35. Like I wrote several times now, it makes no sense to the uninformed reader. Would you pls rephrase it in a way that readers who haven't read the source understand what you want to say? See the discussion page of the article! Thank you. Gray62 ( talk) 17:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Done You may want to check to see that I've done this correctly. I would have made it an indef., but was afraid that being an IP vs. a registered user - that might be extreme, especially as there was a clean block log. Cheers, and have a good day. ;) —
Ched :
? 12:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Zero0000_reported_by_User:LoverOfTheRussianQueen_.28Result:_.29 nableezy - 16:24, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Hey Zero just saw you started editing again. I don't edit much now but its still good to know some of the other old guys are. On a side not I was sure you had died or something since your last edit two years ago mentioned that you were going overseas for a few days.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 04:21, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
For dealing with that so quickly. I'm not even going to bother responding, since I have a feeling the whole exercise is just a way of diluting energies and trying to get a rise of people. Long ago, I might have taken the bait. But I have learned a lot over the past couple of years here. Anyway, thanks for being on the ball. Tiamut talk 12:18, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Zero - can I mark Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Warm_as_ice_request_admin_action as resolved for now - in the knowledge that a final warning has been delivered?-- VirtualSteve need admin support? 12:34, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I´m sort of trying to clean up the depop-1948-villages. I see that you have edited the Abu Shusha-article. Now, there were at least two Abu Shusha-villages; in the Districts of Ramlah and in the District of Haifa (plus there was a "Ghuwayr Abu Shusha" in District of Tiberias).
Presently, it looks as if some of the stuff now in the Abu Shusha (Ramleh)..should be in a -not yet written- Abu Shusha (Haifa)-article. Would you care to take a look? Thanks, Huldra ( talk) 06:56, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
You contributed to a past discussion about the term "Ultra-Orthodox" on the Haredi Judaism page. I removed the content in Haredi Judaism that claimed that "Ultra-Orthodox" is pejorative. I have explained my reasons on the talk page. -shirulashem (talk) 15:31, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
With all due respect, please try to keep comments civil. I assume it was not your intention, but I take a comment like "Neither of your (Shirulashem and Lisa) positions are good enough" to be uncivil and condescending. Please take a look at the dispute resolution policies and, in particular, the policy to keep your comments focused on content. -shirulashem (talk) 13:54, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Though I see it was a few months ago, just noticed now as I'm not that active in Israeli-Palestine articles as before. Not sure if you're aware or not of some good news, but if not, in your absence one of the biggest thorns in many of our sides was finally kicked to the curb. Tarc ( talk) 23:38, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing at Efraim Karsh. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Mr. Hicks The III ( talk) 11:15, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
The reviews of Karsh's book are NOT from an "anonymous unsourced" source. The page is linked to on Karsh's university website. He is the head of the ME program at Kings College London, a prestigious university. If the reviews were not authentic, he obviously would be in massive trouble. Stop the edit war. Of course Karsh puts positive reviews on his page at his school. Tallicfan20 ( talk) 04:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
As I guess according to your name at 'DeirYassinWiki.jpg' map what I've found here there was such Wiki's file. Can you please add details about what happened with it? Thanks, - Igorp_lj ( talk) 22:06, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
no, you're not gonna get me banned. I don't push POV. If you actually read what morris said in the article, he refers to Plan D, which is what Ramla and Lydda were all about, which as you know, the purpose of which was to secure the route. Ok I should have quoted more carefully but this reason for the expulsions as given is well known. I am not POV pushing. You are the one who does that deleting anything you don't like, deleting sourced material and calling it "lies" like you did on the causes of exodus page and with the Palestine Studies citation even when you cannot prove it is wrong. Not everything cited in Peters is a "lie." Unless of course then others can delete things cited in pappe, who is more "discredited." You cannot prove I didn't consult the source from JPS I cited either. But then again, I could easily accuse you of citing things that you haven't read. This is a two-way street tho. And you delete things like you did with the Issa quote because you don't want to see them. You're also the one who kept deleting sourced and quoted material from Efraim Karsh's page. Tallicfan20 ( talk) 05:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Editing the article Fatah subsection on 6th Fatah Assembly
The section on the reference to "Little Eichmann's" adds value to the Eichmann article and is entirely pertinent to scholastic research of the analysis of Eichmann's life; although details of Ward Churchill's story are a digression and not pertinent. Churchill's reference has not only become a modern colloquialism, it is based on Arendt's analysis of Eichmann's life. ZERO0000's basis to remove this sub-section as "not pertinent in its entirety" is censorship which expresses his/her POV. Removing extraneous information about Churchill's story should not be considered censorship, neither should demoting the sub-section to another paragraph in the Analysis section (i.e. removing the header). In conclusion, just because an editor doesn't like Ward Churchill's reference doesn't mean everybody reading about the analysis of Eichmann's life should be deprived of this valuable cross-reference. Tenna ( talk) 10:05, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Tenna
Tenna ( talk) 10:05, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Tenna
Zero - we can agree to compromise if you insist on demoting this sub-section by either folding it into the Analysis section or adding a link in the More section.-- Tenna ( talk) 10:16, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Please review WP:BLP; properly sourced criticism is NOT a BLP violation, and there has been discussion on the talk page at Talk:Rashid_Khalidi#Plagiarism_claim about how to best handle this, and these TWO SENTENCES were considered appropriate by all editors. Please respect wikipedia's policies. Using BLP to improperly remove properly sourced edits is a form of disruptive editing. -- Avi ( talk) 02:50, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. I may very well be wrong, which is why we have talk pages, WT:BLP, and RfC's just to name a few methods. This has been discussed on the talk page, and is being done again there. Let us see if a new consensus emerges. -- Avi ( talk) 04:20, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Zero0000. I'm not exactly sure I understand you though. Do you have the ability to delete articles? Or do you mean you'll nominate them for speedy deletion? -- Al Ameer son ( talk) 04:32, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Yeah somebody added it to the infobox and it went undetected before. Scary really. Lucky I found it! Dr. Blofeld White cat 13:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:PP26Jul1938.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot ( talk) 10:42, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm glad you noted that this is pathetically ill-informed.
I have several times, in the archives, suggested an improvement to the etymology section, which is both ignorant and POV. I laid out a provisory draft before my perma-ban. It ain't much chop, since it simplifies a complex issue, but it does fulfil the minimal requirements, which the section at the moment does not, for writing to encyclopedic levels. A corresponding edit is required to fix Names of Jerusalem, which is organized on a false and misleading chronology that prioritizes later infra-hebraic etymologies over the historically earlier, more broadly semitic hypotheses related to the Egyptian evidence, and comparative cultic theonyms in Ugaritic and Akkadian.
You can find my last suggestion here. I think you yourself did something similar back in 2006?
Regards Nishidani ( talk) 09:16, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
I have again reverted your edit; per WP:BRD we now discuss this matter until consensus is changed or reaffirmed. Reverting past the first time, and knowingly against consensus, is a violation of WP:Edit war and may attract warnings and possibly sanctions. Of course I shall not be the party to do either, and this is only a notice that I suggest the matter is discussed with other editors before another revert takes place. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 14:31, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello Zero0000. A concern has been raised at the BLP noticeboard about talk page comments you have made regarding living persons, specifically this.
The subject is indeed a living person and you use a term that is an unsubstantiated slur. As admins, with significant editing experience, its very important we strictly adhere to WP:BLP, which is perhaps our most important policy. Could I recommend you review Wikipedia:BLP#Non-article space and refactor that comment? I think you could make the same point without resorting to potentially libelous language. Thanks (and feel free to remove this note after consideration). Rockpocke t 06:14, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
There is some new info from the State Department Digest of International Law on my talk page [ here] harlan ( talk) 09:25, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
I think certain currents of Islam have developed strong antisemitic doctrines, and think that should be documented in an article 'The rise of antisemitism in modern Islam. I note that the intensity of wiki pages dealing with this simply has no parallel in the Christianity and antisemitism articles. A lengthy list of vitriolic antisemitism spewing out from the lips of, to name but one Christian denomination, Catholic priests or eminent Catholics (or Anglo-Catholics like T.S. Eliot, vide Christopher Ricks' book and the ensuing polemics) could be, in MEMRI fashion, run up and pasted into a wiki page, and that this is not done because making such pages would be considered politically counterproductive for one nation's interests. Thus, to name just a scant few candidates.
You could, in a hour's reading, run up a similar list of statement of West Bank rabbis (Reuven Firestone speaks of 200) who have publicly come out, on various occasions, with violent abuse about Palestines as Amalekites, in halakhic law, people to be exterminated. (In fact I have one, but I wouldn't make a wiki article out of it) This is why such articles require intelligent non-partisan care. They are framed egregiously to press a political point, and only underscore how, in that area, systemic bias is operating. Regards Nishidani ( talk) 17:30, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
I almost daren't look at it. I think it may have started with material that was moved from elsewhere, and then I got fed up with it. Feel free (at least as far as I'm concerned) to put anything useful something else and redirect it, if you think it best. SlimVirgin talk| contribs 18:42, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Zero0000! A couple things:
Cheers, — Ynhockey ( Talk) 11:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Like an idiot, I left the following for you yesterday on the wrong talk page. [3] Then when you left a comment on the article talk page, I though that meant you were responding to my post, which I then couldn't find when I looked for it this morning. I briefly thought I was going mad, then realized the mistake I'd made. :) So, anyway, here is the request again (and feel free to ignore it completely if you're too busy):
Heyo Zero,
I was serious when I asked you to refactor your comment on Levy and asking you yo tone it down (e.g. descriptives like "wild fanatic"
[4] are innapproriate). Please respond to this request.
Warm regards,
Jaakobou
Chalk Talk 11:18, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Someone who has been here as long as you should know that, you plank. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 15:32, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Don't know it myself, and two people I've asked don't know it either. Its a weird transliteration - neither the right Hebrew one, nor the Hebraized Arabic into English one (which would be Urshalim). Sorry I can't be of more help. Tiamut talk 18:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Zero0000! I noticed that you added this as a source, which implies that you have access to the surveys. Since they are public domain, would it be too much to ask of you to scan or otherwise publish it? These materials are fairly hard to come by these days, but offer amazing insight into Ottoman Palestine, especially in terms of maps. Cheers, Ynhockey ( Talk) 12:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Please discuss the issue and raise your points on the article talk page before you delete my edits in that section. Thanks John Hyams ( talk) 19:05, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I just started Wikipedia:WikiProject Palestine/Sheikh Bureik..just for collecting information. That the land was owned by the Sursuk-family in 1881 probably explains why the village is not mentioned later in the Mandate-period; I assume the land was sold (with the rest of the Sursuk-land) to the Zionist-organisation, like in the Jezreel Valley, and the Arab tenants had to leave.
If you could add any 1596-data, it would be great. Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 23:12, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
On another note; I´m no good at fixing photos, but I think that most of the surroundings should be cut out of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sheikh_Abreik_Grave_in_Kiryat_Tiv'on,_Israel.jpg .....all those gray bushes aren´t really *that* interesting, methinks. And the other picture ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Zaid12.JPG) gives a better/larger view of the surroundings...so I think we should keep that as it is. What do you think? -- Huldra ( talk) 00:32, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
About categories: I guess at the moment we could use
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Villages_depopulated_prior_to_the_1948_Arab–Israeli_War; I see that the villages depopulated in 1967, like
Imwas and
Yalo, use the "Villages depopulated after the 1948 Arab–Israeli War"-category. Eventually, I guess we should/could have a special category/template for these very early depopulated villages; but just now I´m not jumping up and down with enthusiasm at the prospect. (I´m still frantically trying to get my head above the water on the 1948-villages......)
Also; Thanks for the map; I haven´t looked much, but I wasn´t able to find Sheikh Bureik?
Also; the Beit She'arim National Park-article is not very good, at present, to put it mildly. Just to start with the article it refers to, from 2005, The Jewish Magazine: Bet Shearim:
Ok, I think it is about time to finish
Wikipedia:WikiProject Palestine/Sheikh Bureik, and move it into main-space? (At least before we start *the other* "Sheik Abreik"!) You said you could fix the top picture, and take away the gray? And perhaps we could try to make it a DYK? Cheers,
Huldra (
talk) 12:55, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Your editing of Al-Haram, Jaffa made the article much brighter (That's something I can't say about other useres who erased all the information that wasn't suitable for their agenda). All the best, -- Etai han ( talk) 12:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
I have just started collecting them here [5], whenever I come across one. It is not easy to find information on them, (say, Jida is basically just a redir.) Cheers, Huldra ( talk)
Thank you for uploading File:PP14Dec1947.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Skier Dude ( talk) 02:15, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:PP1Oct1939.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk) 02:15, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Zero0000. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have an interest in adding your comments. The thread is User:Ludvikus revisited. Thank you. -- Ludvikus ( talk) 19:05, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
It's important to keep up with the latest scholarship. The article by the above world-class PSM scholar is available online and can be downloaded as a PDF file from this link: Hagemeister, Michael: "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion: PSM - Hagemeister 35 (1103)". Retrieved 2009-09-27. It questions the novelty of the finding reported in the French press. -- Ludvikus ( talk) 01:45, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, i totally agree with what you did in the article, but i don't understand as to why you feel that Tsvi Misinai is unqualified to be quoted as an expert in this field. Even though he lacks academic credentials, he is still a reputed researcher. He is a notable person. His notability is derived from his research on this subject. There are plenty of reputed media sources mentioning him and his work. Even David Ben-Gurion and Yitzhak Ben Zvi lacked academic credentials and they are still quoted. So, if their views can be mentioned, then Misinai's views on this subject should be mentioned, as an assertion, not as a fact. Santiago Matamoros 12:42, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/al-Bassa/index.html
Is THIS how "things are done" in Wikipedia?
Find a blatantly Anti-Zionist, Anti-Semitic site and just Copy & paste?
If THIS is how "things are done" in Wikipedia, please ban me. I wish to have no part in this. AbdulHornochsmannn ( talk) 05:37, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
It says I need an account to access the inside. I will sign up and let you now if I have better luck then. Thanks for everything by the way. Tiamut talk 13:45, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
I am trying to figure out if Jubbata is one and the same place as Jubata ez-Zeit. I've left some links on the talk page that may be of help in ascertaining their locations. Unfortunately, its all Greek to me. I've never been very good at coordinates and the like. Could you take a look and offer your opinion on the matter? Thanks. Tiamut talk 08:16, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, since the Morris-stuff keeps growing; I´ve moved everything about Morris &/or Khalidi to : Huldra/Morris & Khalidi. You are very much welcome with your comments there. (I´m trying to map the relationship between the villages given in Morris &/or Khalidi... eventually also in the: Esber, Rosemarie M. (2008), Under the Cover of War, The Zionist Expulsions of the Palestinians. Arabicus Books & Media. ISBN 0981513174, 9780981513171. -book. ----although the Esber -book I have at the moment has some absolutely horrible printing-errors. Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 09:02, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Have you noticed Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Arutz Sheva? Thought I saw you say some (negative) things about it somewhere and so might want to add an informed comment. John Z ( talk) 11:32, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Very well, no harm in discussing it.
Can someone please explain to me how a "Miltary Assault" is an entirely separate cause for the depopulation than an outright "Expulsion"? The population was there, and then they left. Why did they leave? According to one source it was because they were expelled by Jews. Fine. How did these Jews manage to gain sufficient control of the village to carry through this expulsion? Military Assault. You can't expell people from a place if you don't control that place. All we're talking about here are two separate stages of one alleged cause.
Q: What was the cause of the Holocaust? A: There was no single cause. Indeed there were seventeen:
Cause 1) The rise of National Socialism in Germany; Cause 2) Adolph Hitler's election to Chancellor in 1933; Cause 3) Adolph Hitler's possession of racial theories classifying Jews as subhuman; Cause 4) The implementation of Adolph Hitler's racial theories classifying Jews as subhuman; Cause 5) The construction of Death Camps. Cause 6) The construction of Gas Chambers. Cause 7) The herding of Jews into those Gas Chambers; Cause 8) The introction of the deadly gas "Zyklon B" into those Gas Cambers; Cause 9) The deadly reaction of the Jews to the introduction of Zyklon B into Gas Chambers they happened to have been located in. Cause 10) The cremation of those Jews killed by Zyklon B. Cause 12) Hyper-inflation. Cause 13) The harshness of the Treaty of Versailles. Cause 14) German bitterness over the harshness of the Treaty of Versailles. Cause 15) Mohammad Amin al-Husayni's alliance with Hitler. Cause 16) Al-Husayani's extreme inhospitality in that he refused to so much as allow Jews the most temporary of assylums in Palestine, even if only to save another human's life and kick him out once the war is over. Cause 17) The German need for soap.
But there aren't 17 causes. There is but one: Jew-Hatred.
What would actually be of some USE would be to offer ALTERNATIVE explanations, such as those of Eminent Historian Cecil Roth:
"At the outset the Arab authorities had made it known that any person remaining in the areas controlled by the Jews would be regarded as acquiescing in their political pretentions and would have to answer for it. Thus, with the outbreak of hostilities there took place a wholesale evacuation in preparation for a triumphant return." 70.25.46.99 ( talk) 00:15, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Apparently I did a crime, but I did my time. Yet you've just blocked my acount once again, from alleged transgressions that had occurred PRIOR to my first block.
Look, I did my time. You can't block me again unless I've either recidivised, or warranted a new block for new reasons. You can't punish me from the same crime more than once. That's double jeopardy. 70.25.46.99 ( talk) 00:37, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I agree with you; the present template should be improved. Personally I´m absolutely no good in fixing such technical things, though. Anyway, I have started a discussion over at Template_talk:Infobox_former_Arab_villages_in_Palestine#Improvements_to_the_template, Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 07:20, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
thank you for add source that help prove israelis destroy villages. we must not let pro israel editors water down article title so that it more pleasing to them! the truth be truth. Ani medjool ( talk) 00:41, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Zero!
Since you're one of the few good editors left, could you have a look at West Bank? Seems like a bunch of anti-occupationalists have been having a go at it.
Cheers, pedrito - talk - 17:59 22.11.2009
I'm not trying to interfere, but look again at List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus - the Google book displays incorrectly, it's actually showing p.177 and not p.76-77. I know because I have the book and couldn't find it, but the error in Google is obvious if you open the page at the hyper-link in the article. 86.160.21.92 ( talk) 16:08, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
We regret to inform you that we have no intention of "kindly go[ing] away", and allowing you, and those like you, to continue to deliberately distort history. Our friend "Abdul" has created an OFF-Wikipedia group growing in number day by day. Our group may be a mere 145 strong, but our numbers are growing daily. To-date, only three of us have spoken. One, our founder, from an IP address in Canada, a second from the US, and a third, from, of all places, Saudi Arabia, a mere hour after the second made his post. This is not sockpuppetry. There exists no means of transportation that can transport the same individual from The United States to Saudi Arabia within one hour's time. Within the next several days, please expect to hear from a fourth member, in this instance a certain gentleman writing from an IP address in England, voicing his own personal objection to your deliberate distortion of history. No. We will certainly not "kindly go away". We are here to stay. We are here to fix Wikipedia. No doubt you will delete this post too due to its flagrant violation of WP:CEUWGAPH. Yet we will continue. Unless and until Wikipedia is fixed, we will never "kindly go away". 174.89.234.46 ( talk) 00:15, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Jaffa1953B.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk) 05:44, 13 December 2009 (UTC)