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 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Savant1984_and_User:Zargulon_.28Result:_Protected.29, where I asked you to reconsider. Debresser ( talk) 17:03, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
A post by Savant1984, who is willing to come to an understanding, and another post by Zargulon which is provocative and factually brands him as a disruptive editor, are the basis for a renewed request to reconsider this case on Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Savant1984_and_User:Zargulon_.28Result:_Protected.29. Debresser ( talk) 21:43, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I made a change to your edit and feel you deserve to know why. I am willing to accept religion as opart of a compromise, but I think other terms need to be included too. Fortunately, the Encyclopedia Judaica has a nice line that includes "religion" plus other terms that satisfy me, and this is a reliable source. Since your edit seemed basically just to add the word religion, and since my edit keeps the word religion, I hope you will not object. Slrubenstein | Talk 00:54, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
It seems like WP:CIVIL doesn't matter. I've noticed it many times before. It really hurt me when admins defended someone that kept on calling me a troll. Joe Chill ( talk) 01:33, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Do you have an online copy of David Weber's "A Mighty Fortress" that you could send me? Debresser (talk) 07:46, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm afraid I have never received or responded to a message in Wpedia, so I hope I am doing this right. I have a link to my fileshare, and a PDF of "A Mighty Fortress". Baen Books, Weber's publisher, operates a library site, where their authors can voluntarily post some or all of their books for free. These are the books David Weber has chosen to share, ten in all. I believe all of them are complete. I hope this helps.
Q: The treatment of Jews in "Mighty Fortress" is very complex - is that what inspires you to read it now?
http://www.box.net/shared/lgr4bj864c
http://www.baen.com/library/dweber.htm
Yours, ABEL
Salvagebar ( talk) 20:45, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Mea culpa. This is the link: http://www.box.net/shared/edxe2hnien The EPUB file has the images, maps, etc - you'll need an epub file reader, like Adobe Digital Editions to read it. The html file has the text. Salvagebar ( talk) 03:51, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I checked all pages that transclude {{ Cite ynprcn}} and non use the deprecated date fields (accessyear). I removed the tracking category. I guess you might be watching this template. – droll [chat] 21:46, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Hey Debresser: I started a discussion about the material in question on the talk page. Savant1984 ( talk) 01:25, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
this edit was over the line on personal attacks on the article talk page. Please discuss issues in a less confrontational and less abusive manner with other participants going forwards. Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 22:27, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
I have to warn you. You've reverted me three times in a row on Niddah. If you do it again, you'll be in violation of 3RR. This past time, you actually reverted my edit even though I gave a source. I really don't recommend that you revert it again. - Lisa ( talk - contribs) 22:43, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
It seems like Talk:Moses is a ghost town with dry winds and lots of empty space. Maybe you can stop by here and plant a few green thoughts to brighten the place up, when you have some time. If you know anyone else, it's now an open invite with the RfC posted. Thanks. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 02:21, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
I do not understand your comment here. I thought you did not want to change the hatnote. And here I am, saying the hatnote should not be changed. Yet now you seem to be disagreeing with me - does this mean that you now think the hatnote should be removed? If you agree with me that the hatnote should not be removed, why are you arguing? Or do you just like to argue for the sake of arguing?
If you actually do agree with me, which is what I expected, would you mind removing your comment? I ask because if we are in agreement it is only disruptive, the section is meant to discuss what to do with the history section, not the hatnote, and your adding this comment just derails the discussion. If you agree with my comment, you should have just inserted your comment right after mine, and something like "Agreed about the hatnote." That is all you need to say, I really do not understand your desire to argue.
Of course, if you actually have a comment on what this section is about, I would welcome that whether you do or do not agree with my proposal. Slrubenstein | Talk 10:57, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I hope it is clear to you that this is not what i am advocating. But the hatnote says that people should look to the other article for historical information. You seem to agree with that - yet THIS article has a whole section (7) on historical information! It seems only consistent and logical that it be moved to where we say it is, or the history article. I hope you will express your view on the actual issue 9if you have one), Slrubenstein | Talk 18:08, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
On your User Page you write that the death penalty should be used for certain crimes. I wonder what is your opinion of Schopenhauer's statement: "Those who would like to abolish it should be given the answer: 'First remove murder from the world, and then capital punishment ought to follow.' "? It appears in his The World as Will and Representation, Vol. II, Ch. 47 and is mentioned in the Wikipedia article on Schopenhauer, in the "Punishment" sub–section. Lestrade ( talk) 17:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)Lestrade
In the same chapter, he wrote: "It should be inflicted even for the definite attempt at murder, just as for murder itself; for the law's desire is to punish the deed, not to avenge the result." Lestrade ( talk) 17:43, 30 May 2010 (UTC)Lestrade
I have started Phase III and am in the process of breaking the help into separate pages, starting with the most prevalent errors. Please review and comment:
---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 14:04, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes I was going to drop you a note. I am quite pleased with the progress, most parameters can now be dropped altogether. Rich Farmbrough, 10:03, 31 May 2010 (UTC).
It is historic. Maybe the refresh button belongs somewhere else, or isn't needed. (I built the original to cope with all the varieties out there, so that I wouldn't get complaints about "features" vanishing. There's no reason it can't be simplified to some extent now.) Rich Farmbrough, 12:32, 31 May 2010 (UTC).
Why did you change "Jewish People" at the Judaism article? I think you were wrong to change what I wrote, and I changed it back. If you still do not understand why this is correct please let me know and we can discuss it, but please do not revert me. thanks. Slrubenstein | Talk 11:50, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Dude, you reverted my edit without discussion, Please stop projecting. Slrubenstein | Talk 20:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Dude, I gave my explanation, and you still have not responded to it - other than to revert me without discussion. Discussion takes two. I have provided my explanation. So who is edit warring? Slrubenstein | Talk 14:30, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
I am not going to make a big deal of it, but I really don't think you had a right to delete a talk page comment (I checked the guidelines), even if you considered it constructive.
I had made the comment mainly to learn two things:
If he was working with you, so I could adjust for that.
And to gain some insight into why I tend to get few responses. Mzk1 ( talk) 19:54, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
It's in my edit summary for the reversion and in the protection log. Punkox is a long-term block evader from Peru, generally editing with anonymous Peruvian IP addresses. Since he's defacto banned, I revert all of his edits. With the extremely long term evaders, I semi-protect any articles they touch.— Kww( talk) 05:57, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Sometimes vandals register as a way of getting around a protection, and I really wanted just to drive them away. But if you think a lower level would work, I will lower the protection, Slrubenstein | Talk 10:42, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Debresser: Because of your interest in this topic, you will hopefully be able to upgrade the Sholom Rubashkin article and add a balanced WP:NPOV to this important biography. You may also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sholom Rubashkin. Sincerely, IZAK ( talk) 16:34, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Regarding your note at my Talk, do whatever you please. I'm "retired", only log in very rarely to fix truly blatant vandalism. I don't know why you object to "loopback", and with all due respect I just don't care anymore. I served my time debating with editors who presume others understand their motivations, and am content I did my share. Pete St.John ( talk) 20:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Your name was on the 2nd dramaout signup and the organizer of the 2nd one suggested notifying those who signed up the last time. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:The_Great_Wikipedia_Dramaout/3rd#Participating_Wikipedians
and also a mention on WP:ANI. I would love to have you participate! Remember July 5th, the starting date! Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 15:14, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
...is very nicely organized and informative, one of the best I've seen. Well done!
שבת שלום, --
Deborahjay (
talk) 11:46, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
See here. I don't think there will be a problem having it deleted. I had planned to make a pass through the other templates in that category and either (a) refactor them to call {{ infobox character}} and/or (b) nominate them for deletion after replacement. There are just so many of them that it make take some time. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:56, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
OK.
First, the current text is from a critical-historiacal source, and says that the bride was purchased FROM THE FATHER. ALWAYS. This is in direct opposition to the traditional view. I meant to revise and quote the Gemara "Et Biti Natati".
Second the paragraph you removed is mostly sourced and and was in my original. You did not remove it then, please note. Of course it is POV, it is meant to balance.
Please explain. Mzk1 ( talk) 20:20, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
outdentIMHO the best thing would be to find an additional source, which should be more specific, and then attribute it as you indicated with specific mention of source. Debresser ( talk) 20:24, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
I moved the discussion "Should every BIO of a Jew be part of Wikiproject Judaism", which you recently participated in, to the talk page of WP Judaism's MOS. This is an important subject and needs to be incorporated into the MOS once we reach a consensus. -shirulashem (talk) 18:22, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Please read WP:3RR. More than three reverts in a single day and you may be blocked for a short while from editing. Bali ultimate ( talk) 09:16, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but WP:3RR and WP:EW clearly forbid the conduct you engaged in here.
Having a strong opinion in a content dispute and assuming bad faith about other contributors do not excuse edit warring, especially and particularly past the point of 3RR.
Please do not repeat this behavior. Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 21:25, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first. I'm a bit confused - my edit was to reverse the watering-down and apologetic edit by the IP. A Sniper ( talk) 16:42, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
To which your recent edits to the sandbox might, or might not, have interfered with this ongoing process on the talkpage. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 13:55, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Here's to you on your birthday, Debresser! From the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! |
Armbrust Talk Contribs 23:30, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi Debresser: A discussion and related vote you participated in is being reviewed at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#All talk pages, and more, were notified about the discussions and proposed moves. You may want to add your views to the ongoing discussion. Thank you, IZAK ( talk) 05:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Re. Template talk:Judaism#Template's width
Can you please follow up on this one re. the IP users request? I'm sure you'll understand my reasoning re. the {{editsemiprotected}}, and perhaps you can make the edit if/when appropriate? Cheers, Chzz ► 19:41, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
On the page for Spherical Harmonic, where I had the mathematics link that you changed, I was trying to set it up so the link would go to the section titled mathematical Fiction on the Asaro Wiki page. Do you know how to do that? All I could do was get it to go to the top of the Asaro page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.107.127.25 ( talk) 03:07, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Please see my note on the "Musar Literature" talk page. I'd make a case for adopting the former spelling on the Wikipedia page -- not just because there's no dagesh in the samech, but also because this is the way that academics spell the phrase. Thanks! Moreh405 ( talk) 03:40, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
I found you reverted my edits of SDPI article. Could you please tell me the reason for reverting the changes -- Indiashines ( talk) 02:31, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Dovid. I just came across Category:Templates for merging, which you created in October 2009. Its banner claims that, "this category contains templates which have been listed for deletion." However the category is in reality filled with more than 35,000 article pages. It doesn't really contain any templates (okay, it appears to contain exactly one, Template:Tfm-inline, plus two template/doc pages), or template messages (per the redirected link).
I'm inclined to take it over to CfD, but figured there must be something to this cat that I don't know about, so I thought I'd ask you and maybe Koavf (who just recently hid the category) about it first. What is this thing really? What's it do for us? I'm watching your page if you want to answer hereRegards, — JohnFromPinckney ( talk) 02:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
It's wonderful to be noticed. Thanks for the compliment at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 August 12#Template:Tfdnotice2! :-) -- Bsherr ( talk) 22:48, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello Rabbi Debresser! I worked on Template:Kabbalah, to its previous full format, but notice it has recently been collapsed and redesigned. What is your opinion of these last changes? I'm not necessarily fully against the collapsed format, especially if that is wikipedia policy, but have the following concerns:
Alternatively, if you think the non-collapsed format was better in principle, then tell me. I am automatically open to that view - a similar format, for example, to the Chabad template. If one can get away with it, I would actually far prefer it - I mainly go along with collapsing it, as I guess it's unlikely others would leave it like that, in view of likely wikipedia policy. However, I do wonder why the wikipedia community (rightly) leaves the Chabad template uncollapsed!
Whether or not all the entries merit inclusion within the template is a separate issue, but I notice that the Jewish philosophy template has a similar number of direct and contextualising entries. I sent a copy of this also to User talk:IZAK#Kabbalah template, in resonse to his compliment of the Jewish philosophy template, to see his opinion! What do you think? With best wishes April8 ( talk) 17:41, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
No problem. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 17:39, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Please explain I don't know why you reverted my edit to {{ Filmr}}; isn't it useful to have these in a tracking category? Please respond on my talk. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 18:28, 20 August 2010 (UTC
If you have a problem with the English that is fine however don't determine relevancy based on the number of Messianic Jews. Messianic Jews outnumber Karaites by a huge margine yet I bet you wouldn't maginalize the tzaddikim. I am reverting my addition to Posekem.(I didn't revert)
I apologize. Nor did I revert.
hehe I usually don't do big edits and oy, I've been doing that manually for like ever now it seems haha. -- Teacherbrock ( talk) 19:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I hate arguing, just isn't my cup of tea. I do small tweaks and edits. Every once in awhile I will throw in a paragraph or something. If it sticks it sticks, if it doesn't then, oh well. I've had my fair share of edit wars and I don't like them at all. :p -- Teacherbrock ( talk) 19:15, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Debresser: This is a kind reminder and request, that when you nominated Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Significance of numbers in Judaism, that as an experienced WPian by now, it would have been the correct protocol and courtesy to let the original creator User Xyz7890 ( talk · contribs) [6] know about it (wouldn't you want this done for you if it was the other way around?), per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#Notifying interested people:
{{subst:
AFDWarningNew|Article title}} ~~~~
{{subst:
AFDWarning|Article title}} ~~~~
{{subst:
Adw|Article title}} ~~~~
{{subst:
AFDNote|Article title}} ~~~~
You could and should have also listed it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism. Thank you very much! IZAK ( talk) 13:13, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
FYI Help:Cite errors#A page shows in the reference error category, but no cite errors show. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 13:29, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi-Just wanted to let you know that the reason why I put the noinclude tags into the directions was due to this problem at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vpt#.7B.7Btfm.7D.7D_help_needed . When someone didn't put the noinclude tags on the {{ see also category}} template, it was placing template pages that transcluded "see also category" into the "templates for merging" category, i.e., template:vandalism information was in there, because it transcludes template:see also category on its /doc pg. My thoughts were to remind editors to use the tags, so this doesn't happen, confusing everyone (including me!) to which template is supposed to be merged. Apparently, the transculsion problem only applies to template/doc pgs, and you can see at the templates for merging category, that there are numerous pages in there, that haven't been flushed out from before "see also category" had the tfm put inside of the noinclude tags. Is there a way to prevent the auto-categorization on transcluded template pages?? I know there has to be a code out there, somewhere! -- Funandtrvl ( talk) 20:10, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
#switch:{{PAGENAME}}
around the category, but I'm not familiar enough with {{
Tfm}} to be comfortable making the change myself. 「
ダイノガイ
千?!」
? ·
Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 20:38, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Howdy. When you create new cats for articles with dead ext. links, you may want to add some parameters to fix what is displayed.-- Rockfang ( talk) 07:53, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob ( talk) 23:32, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
You may be amused to know that these now nominate themselves for CSD when they are empty, and over a month old. Rich Farmbrough, 06:21, 24 September 2010 (UTC).
I have asked the maintainer of the uncategorized articles list to update the programming so that {{ uncategorized stub}} is recognized as being "tagged" — but until he actually does so, the issue is that {{ uncat}} gets an article off the "untagged" list, while "uncategorized stub" does not. I've been trying, more or less singlehandedly, to manage a backlog which was over 42,000 articles two months ago — and it simply doesn't help to have articles which are tagged with "uncategorized stub" reappearing on the list every day.
Please also be aware that while the categorization project certainly prefers that "uncategorized stub" be used instead if an article has a stub category, the rules explicitly state that "uncat" is also okay. The latter template isn't ideal, but it's not inappropriate or unacceptable either, as stub categories don't count toward an article being considered categorized. Bearcat ( talk) 16:19, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Good news...finally got the change implemented, so pages tagged with {{ uncategorized stub}} don't get listed as "untagged" anymore. So I can finally start using that template properly! (*grin*) Bearcat ( talk) 17:45, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
You should know better by now than to make threats [9] against others rather than engaging in constructive discussions. In light of your past violations of WP:NPA against me I ask you to either withdraw your threat or apologize. In the discussion at Talk:Breslov (Hasidic dynasty)#Dynasty vs "group" I have indicated that you have a history of this. To make it clear that you get this message I am re-posting it here for you: Debresser, your open threats violate WP:CIVIL (viz WP:THREATEN) and undermine WP:AGF as you now openly violate WP:NPA and WP:EQ rather than engage in constructive discussions that while they may be WP:BEBOLD are very necessary and legitimate. In all my years at WP I have always adhered to WP:NPOV in the creation and editing of articles and categories, I would have heard from others by now if this was an issue. On the other hand on talk pages I like to frankly discuss more issues. You have constantly refused to show any basic decency as you keep up your crass and vulgar insults, as you do here by insulting me yet again with allegations about "tendentious editing and wild accusations that have no connection with reality" as you have in the past, see (until January 2010) Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Chabad movement/Evidence#User:Debresser’s pro-Chabad POV editing and diffs, especially point 9 where you resort to: "violations of WP:NPA by repeatedly calling into question the "sanity" of the nominator: "mentally ill", [10], [11], inserts "FBI", [12], "Food for psychiatrists", [13], "insane ranting", [14], [15]." So what are you going to say, that you are "innocent" and anyone who disagrees with you is "guilty"? Your time would be better spent by involving yourself in the content of this discussion than by indulging your tendencies to do the wrong things. IZAK ( talk) 05:00, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Diamon Star CD cover.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk 05:09, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Just a head-up that Category:Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases and its subcategories have been listed for speedy renaming (for a minor punctuation fix). -- Pascal 666 07:14, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi Debresser: Could you point me to the place on WP where a broad "consensus" was reached to reduce the Mussar movement article by one "s" and make it into "Musar" since there is no record of any such discussion on the Talk:Musar movement page where it should have been or at least noted. I have started such a discussion at Talk:Musar movement#Musar or Mussar. Please contribute to that discussion (instead or running around making all sorts of wild threats against me, try positive discussions). Thanks, IZAK ( talk) 01:54, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
See:
Thanks, IZAK ( talk) 07:45, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi Debresser: Please stop removing the names of notable and even famous poskim without further discussion. Simply because some poskim may not be be known to one, is no grounds to wipe names off WP articles and lists without at least some discussion, perhaps even at WP:TALKJUDAISM. See Talk:Posek#Notable Poskim where this could be discussed now. Thanks, IZAK ( talk) 02:02, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Diamon Star CD cover.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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 22:53, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Slow but steady wins the race. — Robert Greer ( talk) 16:44, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Help please. Can you make it more balanced ? Posted plenty which should be relevant on talk page ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.122.113 ( talk) 03:12, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Sockpuppet engaged in countless edits overnite without any sources. Can you assist here and support my balanced edits. They dont comment or reply. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.122.113 ( talk) 11:17, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Can you please assist in reviewing Rabbi Pinto page ? There's very few Wiki editors versed in Judaism. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.112.21.194 ( talk) 10:35, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Template:Passive voice/doc, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:Passive voice/doc and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:Passive voice/doc during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Kumioko ( talk) 02:38, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Well mine wasn't a bad choice. Yours is just more exact :) -- User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 17:08, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello - I came across the page titled Jewish theology of love and thought that I might be able to help fix it. It was in pretty terrible shape, mostly consisting of a personal essay regarding Franz Rosenzweig. I tried reformatting the article a bit, especially by adding material from the Jewish Encyclopedia article on love. I left the material on Rosenzweig at the end of the article, though I think that this should probably be greatly condensed. Anyhow, I then saw that you had suggested the article should be deleted, which it probably should have been. Now that I've put some work into it, though, I'd like to think it may be salvageable. If at any point down the line you want to help me salvage that page, I'd appreciate the help. I also thought that maybe it should be retitled "Jewish views of love" rather than "Jewish theology of love," since not all relevant views might be "theological" in character. Lkjowa ( talk) 18:27, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Template:Expand has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. 134.253.26.6 ( talk) 22:44, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi, what is your opinion about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Chabad houses? IZAK ( talk) 04:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
How ugly. Only saying. Gwen Gale ( talk) 13:11, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Well, Nurse Echo, the issue of those meaningless "fame and fortune" names is resolved. Now, how to make the rest of that cast list more orderly and meaningful. Any thoughts? Drmargi ( talk) 13:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Is it time for an ANI for incivility on Tumadoireach? Drmargi ( talk) 07:28, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
ANI is apparently mostly for for death threats, racist attacks, threats of violence, legal threats and suchlike Drmargi -but you presumably already knew that. I have looked at it prompted by your mentioning it. One to bear in mind. Thanks for the info.-- Tumadoireacht ( talk) 14:23, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
I enjoyed you homepage/user page with all the colourful and informative lozenges about your interests and tastes. I must get around to learning how to do that.
Just a thought on the subject of taste; Civilian Palestinian, Gazan, or Lebanese editors or readers who have lost adult relatives or children to Israeli gunship helicopter invasions might find your humour on the subject offensive.
You may be unaware that sales of this helicopter to Israel were blocked recently by the USA over concerns about civilian deaths and its ongoing threat to Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip. "During the recent war, Israel made considerable use of the Longbow, and there were high civilian casualties in the Gaza Strip" per the Wikipedia article about the war use.
For those of us who have lost close ones to suicide it is never a subject for humour or mockery.
The assertion in the photo caption that the helicopter does its killing within Israel may be additionally problematic for obvious reasons concerned with territory definition and could be seen as additionally offensive.
Would you consider removing it either on the grounds of good taste or civil? After all civility really IS one of the five pillars of Wikipedia, unlike, say, Notability. The penguin photo, on the other hand is very funny.-- Tumadoireacht ( talk) 12:38, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Much as it pains me to agree with our aquatic friend, Debresser, I can see that this could be taken as Not Funny At All in some quarters. In the interest of WikiHarmony, would you please consider removing it? Thanks.-- SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 13:33, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Debresser. Near the bottom of your userpage, there is a statement "No, there was no connection between the lowest two banners in the "My facts and opinions" columns.". Just to let you know, the link is broken (I think it needs to be changed to link to User:Debresser#About myself). Regards. DH85868993 ( talk) 09:23, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi, a while back you asked this question [17] at WP:Stub querying why the guidance said that an extra blank line should be inserted after the categories and before the stub. I have read the ensuing discussion and it seemed like more editors agreed with you that there appeared to be limited justification for this, although the discussion did then get quite technical about asbox and CSS, and seemed to end with Rich Farmborough asking some 'asbox experts' about the ramifications. You chased things once but you do any further chasing beyond what's in the thread. You may be aware that the MoS has a link to your thread when justifying the use of the double line [18]. Regards. Eldumpo ( talk) 18:09, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello again. Thanks for making a post at AWB, although unfortunately there has been no further follow-up. Like yourself it seems, I often get irritated by the number of bot and tool edits to articles on my watchlist, most of which are very minor and cosmetic, and some of which may have no basis to be made at all e.g. the double white space issue. Another issue came up for me today regarding a 'dash script' and I posted a thread at [20]. You can see that my queries are raising wider questions on the use of bots and tools in a more integrated way, and you can see a response was made suggesting raising the issue at Village Pump. The recent responses on this I've made have tended to be at the technical bot users themselves rather than wider comment, so perhaps it would be useful to try and obtain further views. I was wondering if you'd sought any wider input on this before, and whether VP or something like RfC is the best start? Regards. Eldumpo ( talk) 17:24, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for yours corrections in User:Genevieve2/sandbox08. I hope you have a Shabbat with happiness, peace and serenity. Shabbat Shalom. אני אוהב אותך -- Geneviève ( talk) 12:07, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the compliment. Yea, those categories are only populated by templates, and they are pretty convoluted because they seem to add articles to multiple categories, and many template populate one of the categories making this category overpopulated. I am not savvy with the documentation, so I hope my brute work can help the cleaning. Bernolákovčina ( talk) 17:17, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Bernolákovčina ( talk) 17:43, 15 January 2011 (UTC)The Manual of Style (often abbreviated MoS or MOS) is a style guide for Wikipedia articles that encourages editors to follow consistent usage and formatting
with my deepest fellow regard and hope that we can continue to learn from each other --— Tumadoireacht Talk/ Stalk 10:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 23:31, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Debresser,
as to your first question (why I added the no definition template), there's not much more to say than: There was no definition :-) I read the introduction and still had no idea what a parlement was, only what it developed out of. That's why I added the template. As to your second question (whether your definition is correct): I have no idea -- if I'd known what a parlement is, I would have added a definition myself :-)
Thanks for adding a definition -- it makes the article much more intelligible to me. A further improvement would be to blend the first sentence with the definition into the opening paragraph -- as it stands, the following sentence is partly redundant.
Joriki ( talk) 00:55, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
I did have chance to take part in the discussion on Template talk:R from other template before you moved templates and categories that I was watching. Please do not move things like that without a proper discussion at CFD or TFD, especially if the small discussion that did take place was not even on the talk page of a page that was moved. McLerristarr | Mclay1 15:32, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
"That is no reason to remove a useful link. Why are you trying to own these template?" I'm not trying to own the templates. "What links here" counts any redirect page with a link as a redirect to that link. Redirect pages weren't designed to have extra text on them but then someone (not me) decided they should. If you look at the "What links here" page of WP:UBX (the redirect page), every page that has Template:R to userbox template transcluded on it is counted as a redirect to WP:UBX. To avoid this, it's easy to just not put links on redirects. There's already a link the category page, which should provide more information than the template and can contain any helpful links. McLerristarr | Mclay1 04:53, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
See
User_talk:Rich_Farmbrough#SmackBot:_spacing_before_stub_tags.
Rich
Farmbrough, 20:29, 5 February 2011 (UTC).
You reverted my change here saying there was no discussion. The reason you didn't see my discussion here was probably because it got archived by MisraBot II here.
In light of this information, would you be willing to undo your revert? — Stepheng3 ( talk) 04:58, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
I really don't understand how it is edit warring on my behalf. Another user has been putting inaccurate maps of Armenia, and I've been changing them as a result. I'm only protecting the integrity of the article. The map that I am putting up puts Armenia in a Europe context, which is very accurate as politically Armenia is aligned with Europe. Second, the similar sized and positioned Caucasian countries (Georgia and Azerbaijan) all have this pro Europe map, and I really don't understand why Armenia should be any different. It too like them is aligned with Europe politically. One must understand that this is not a geographic map, but a political one, and political is supposed to show with what part of the world the country in question is politically aligned. So, I am not the one at fault here, it this other user (Kentronhayastan) that is changing the map into something wrong. I will not rest until this is properly resolved, as I don't want inaccurate maps representing my country. MosMusy ( talk) 22:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your assistance, by the way, are you also Jewish? HaYehudi 18:54, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
The article Erewhon (Honorverse) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Sadads (
talk) 02:08, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Can't seem to find the ANI on Mclay1, not from my link, Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Mclay1, nor in the archives. Was it moved? withdrawn? — Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX ) 03:10, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Never mind, I found it. — Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX ) 20:55, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Erewhon (Honorverse) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is not nominated for speedy deletion, it is a proposed deletion. As such, per WP:PROD, if you wish to contest deletion, just delete the deletion tag. As it's been up on PROD for a few days, deletion tag expiry will occur before your one-week deadline on merger occurs. So the closing admin may choose to delete the article at that time. It'd be easier if you just removed the PROD tag. 65.93.15.125 ( talk) 04:41, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Just wrote this up to say you have an excellent page Dovid, and glad to see a brother on wikipedia. I've taken a few tips from your page and edited my own. I'm very happy now with mine. Yours is very inspiring and well-organized. I had all of my userbox(es) in the Babel box before tonight lol. Hope your Purim is great "next month" (Gregorian-wise), I'm really looking forward to it.-- Smart30 ( talk) 09:15, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, sorry for the late reply. Please read the discussion before accusing me of edit warring and threatening to get be blocked. The original map was the orthographic projection, in use for about a year, and on all other language Wikipedia articles of Armenia. MosMusy decided to change the map without starting a discussion, and I reverted it back and asked for a discussion. Yet he continuously changed it back without coming to a mutual understanding with me. In other words, he began an edit war. Now that we have come to a consensus, I accept it (in fact, I even made the Europe map that we're using now, just to show that I wasn'T simply biased toward the orthographic projection). Kentronhayastan ( talk) 16:00, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Should I remove William Allen Simpson's addition now? Honestly, it seems to me like five people disagreeing with all or part of his one-man consensus addition is enough to remove it (only one other person, retroactively, appears to agree with it). All Hallow's Wraith ( talk) 06:40, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Typically I think breaks are frequently needed, especially when dealing with two or more portals, because I don't want the portal boxes to spill into the References/Notes sections. Remember that not everybody uses the same monitors, so what doesn't spill over on one monitor spills over on another. WhisperToMe ( talk) 23:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to turn your attention to two users, dbachmann and moreschi that have barged in and been changing the Armenia map, and other things in addition. Let me remind you that this issue had already been resolved and everything was going fine, until these people showed up. Given they are only pushing these changes for Armenia, I am rather suspicious of their intentions. MosMusy ( talk) 17:13, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
I find your comment rather depressing, Debresser. You ask me to do a "proper discussion" of the question? Then I should wonder what, in your opinion, I have done instead. You will note, if you care to look at the talkpage, that I have discussed the issue, based on references, which is the entire point of this project. While, otoh, all MosMusy has done is yell at me in boldface and ignore the point. So I am not sure what you think a " discussion" is supposed to look like, but it certainly bears no resemblance to anything I would consider worthy of a project to build an encyclopedia. May I remind you that this isn't a forum, or a social community? If MosMusy has any kind of case to make, let him do that. But that is of course an academic point, as it is crystal clear that he does not. -- dab (𒁳) 19:50, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Prove to me that Armenia is politically not part of Europe and thus does not belong in the context of Europe. Prove to me why Georgia and Azerbaijan deserve Europe context maps, but Armenia deserves a middle east/asian map. The South Caucasus as a whole, deserve a Europe context map as that's where their sphere of influence, especially politically lies. MosMusy ( talk) 20:10, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
lol, this user now came to my talkpage claiming that he is replacing the map because "Armenia is politically Europe". I invite you to google the width and depth of the internets for this insight: "Armenia is politically Europe". Oh yes, are two hits for it! Oh wait, they are google's cache of MosMusy's comment at Talk:Armenia plus one mirror. Talk about abusing Wikipedia to push your personal opinion as WP:TRUTH.
But perhaps MosMusy was trying to say that "Armenia is politically in Europe" and is simply a little grammatically challenged? Let's "write for the enemy" and assume that's what he was trying to say. "Armenia is politically in Europe". Oh yeah! The wide, wide internet has one (1) occurrence of this statement. This deep and encyclopedic truth has been uttered by "Lord Mov" at twcenter.net/forums/ on April 12, 2010, 02:30 PM. It goes without saying that this discovery trumps our pathetic references, such as the UN, the CIA, and OUP, and clearly establishes that MosMusy is not only right, he is a gleaming gem of encyclopedic expertise, well worthy to be pampered with our full range of Wikipedia:Expert retention measures. -- dab (𒁳) 09:21, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only 5 minutes. cooldenny ( talk) 18:28, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
You should read WP:MOSDAB, what you did adding the material now sourced is contraindicated by that. Moreover, you are labeling the various Pincus named people as bearing an Ashkenazic Jewish surname; does your labeling meet our standards of categorization of people and of WP:BLP. No, it falls well short. You have no sources that all those people bear that name, any more than one may assume anyone surnamed Lee is Korean (Robert E. Lee would be surprised for example were he alive). You should check your edits to make sure you comply with the consensus about how pages should look, what they should contain, and what they shouldn't. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 18:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
The construction of Judaism as an Ethnic origin is partially rooted in anti-semetic ideology. Individuals may become Jewish, by deciding to observe Judaism. Primo Levi was a scientist, was not an observant Jew, he was labelled ethnically by the Nazi's as a Jew, and was persecuted for their unfounded belief in Judaism as an Ethnicity. He was born in Italy to Italian parents, spoke Italian, has the potential to have family history residing in Italy since Roman times. By simply refering to him as a Jew removes his equally important identity as an Italian which the Nazi Germans were able to effectively remove from him. As for it being a well known fact, Ethnicity is not something that is firmly rooted in scientific empiricism. With this said, placing Primo in this artificial category passively conveys an affirmation with Nazi-german ideology pertaining to eugenics. If you wish to describe his Jewish culture, I suggest adding another hearder, or adjusting this header. Leaving Ethnicity: Jewish in a web source where the ignorant go to learn about things, you are perpetuating an "truth" that is rooted in racist, Nazi ideology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.60.154 ( talk) 05:10, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
You've misread the WP:Manual of Style (biographies): 2. Ethnicity or sexuality should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability. Similarly, previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability. Please self-revert.
Further, if you can quote a manual of style, you certainly could be expected to know how to use a talk page. Please keep that in mind. Jd2718 ( talk) 18:12, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Related: I think the Belarussian in the lead needs to go, esp. the claim that this is his original name. The Russian clearly should stay. Yiddish probably needs to be added - but I am neither capable of finding the correct spelling nor typing it on WP. I see you have some level of knowledge of Yiddish. Can you help, or perhaps find someone who can? (I've written the same comment and request on the article's talk page) Jd2718 ( talk) 18:20, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Why is Category:Medieval Jews in Palestine "misleading"? Were there no Jews in Palestine during the medieval era?! Chesdovi ( talk) 11:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Instead of telling me to wait for consensus, I advise you to hold your horses yourself. It will save us both a lot of time. Chesdovi ( talk) 20:18, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
"Editor seems blinded by some POV pushing of the term Palestinian, that he forgets the guy was Jewish". Being Palestinian and Jewish is not an oxymoron. Stop your rampage or face the consequences. Chesdovi ( talk) 22:54, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
That was a bad edit. You removed Palestinian and replaced it with Jewish in a flagrant act of censorship to suit you own irrational POV. Why do you insist on removing the fact that Jews who lived in Palestine can not be referred to as Paletinian? I have not got a satisfactory answer from you. This is how many sources refer to such people. Why cannot we not use this designation? You refuse to do so even with a source! Are you anti-Palestinian? Explain yourself once and for all. Are you some fanatic zionist who doesn't want to mention the word Palestine? What is it with you. Chesdovi ( talk) 01:34, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Debresser and Chesdovi are both topic banned from Israeli / Palestinian topic areas for 72 hrs due to disruptive editing and edit warring, with a healthy dose of personal attacks and incivility thrown in. This sanction is enacted under the Arbcom case sanctions and will be so logged.
Please DO NOT CONTINUE this behavior after the 72 hr ban is over. Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 03:19, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
As you apparently were not previously warned...
As a result of an arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, broadly understood. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad editing restrictions, described here and below.
These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.
Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary.
This notice is only effective if given by an uninvolved administrator and logged here. Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 07:42, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
You claim that the Holy Land was not called "Palestine" during the 13th cent. or is referred to by that term nowadays. Please give the common english name of what the region was called during the 13th-century (1200-1299CE). Chesdovi ( talk) 14:30, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Well i'll take that as a clear answer that you now CONCEED that the AREA WAS KNOWN AS PALESTINE IN THE 1200'S since you did not address this at all in your previous response, but decided to change the subject. Now the next problem: Who gives you the wiki RIGHT to expalin to ME what the paramenters for Rabbis of X cats are. Are you an expert on this? I don't have a wiki doctorate on it. Maybe you do? The sources are literally STACKED against you. DO YOU NOW CONCEDE THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE OF YOU FORCING YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT BELONGS WHERE OVER MINE? Chesdovi ( talk) 16:01, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
I have populated many rabbis according to their rightful regional designations without any fuss for years. Ottoman rabbis, German rabbis, Catalan rabbis, English rabbis, Syrian rabbis, Iraqi rabbis, Bohemian rabbis, etc. I created Category:French Tosafists, Category:American Haredi rabbis, etc, etc. Why has my inuition now been the center of contention? It is some extreme political POV issue. Accept that fact. Have you noticed how only you and SD have been involved? Does that not say something? You keep on going on about the "community". One right-wing zionist and another right-wing pro-palestinian. Sure both content these cats for differeing issues, but can you not see how both of you are seriously impeded by your POV? For you to go ahead and depopulate so many pages without agreement is seriously problematic. If it turns that that you have anything to do with Pallomine who finihed off your grand job of depopulating Palestinian categories, that will be the end of you here. Chesdovi ( talk) 14:40, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
If I feel the word is jusified I WILL ADD IT and continue to do so until you and I come to a soltion which is accepatble to both of us. Not one enforcing his view of what is just or not on the other, which you appear intent on doing. Chesdovi ( talk) 16:38, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Since you are under a topic ban, perhaps it would be best if you didn't post a message concerning the topic at WT:JUDAISM. Just a suggestion. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 22:08, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Even after Chesdovi's edit, it still says "Palestinian rabbi and Jewish mystic". (Nevertheless, I just reverted it as redundant, because the sentence ends "in Ottoman Palestine".) Maybe I should have been clearer. I was speaking about the subject of your dispute at ANI—I don't have a preference concerning the categories. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 22:36, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
You gave 3 reasons why the Palestinian rabbis category is not worthy here: Q1)The fact that somebody is a rabbi in a country does not mean he has the local nationality, especially since many (or even most) of them were not born there. A1)It seems from the sources that this very issue of residence does confer identity (or nationality) with a given region. We have Menachem Lonzano who was born abroad, yet upon living in Palestin, is called by RS Palestinian. Q2)There is too much confusion with the term Palestine being an ethnicity and not a geographical location. A2)This concern can be dismissed since the category is under the parent category which lists the nationality of Rabbis. Secondly, with all rabbis being of Jewish ethnicity, there can be no confusion about their ethnicity if they are being linked with a regional nationality. Would Ottoman Jews be a problem, lest we think they are Turkish and not Jewish? Should we not categorise Category:American rabbis as we may be confused to think they are descended from red indians? Q3)During the 13th century, the place was definitely not called Palestine. A3) That is an myth. And as you did not respond to my previous post about this I take you you now conceed there was. Chesdovi ( talk) 22:34, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
I think I discern some anti-zionism in your edits, especially your last one. I would find it interesting to discuss that with you, completely regardless of our disagreement. Debresser ( talk) 23:17, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
If I understand you correctly you think that Chabad sees the State of Israel as lechatchila? Debresser ( talk) 23:20, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Why do you say that the establishment of Jewish selfgovernment is against halakha? Debresser ( talk) 23:23, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Really file an appeal at WP:AE. At ANI, you will probably just be continuously ignored in the house style of skimming over WP:TLDR back-and-forths between two editors. Tijfo098 ( talk) 21:18, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Since "a synagogue is always for Jews, formost locals, but actually any Jew from over the world can come and pray there", shall we removed the reference to "Syrian" in this article? Chesdovi ( talk) 12:21, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Debresser. What to do next? I have just left this message on Chesdovi's talk page. Please advise: "You recently created Category:Judean rabbis a few days ago in spite of warnings not to create such categories that have brought you into the midst of editorial conflicts with other users and in spite of a number of related CfDs and calls for discussions about this subject at Category_talk:16th-century_Palestinian_rabbis#Rfc and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism#Rabbis categories for renaming. You are violating WP:CONSENSUS and the terms of the warnings that were issued to you recently, see User talk:Chesdovi#ARBPIA 72 hr topic ban. Please cool it, or further sanctions against you will be requested. Thank you," IZAK ( talk) 19:24, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Please do not add unsourced content, as you did to Yitzchak Ginsburgh. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 13:14, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
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 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Savant1984_and_User:Zargulon_.28Result:_Protected.29, where I asked you to reconsider. Debresser ( talk) 17:03, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
A post by Savant1984, who is willing to come to an understanding, and another post by Zargulon which is provocative and factually brands him as a disruptive editor, are the basis for a renewed request to reconsider this case on Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Savant1984_and_User:Zargulon_.28Result:_Protected.29. Debresser ( talk) 21:43, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I made a change to your edit and feel you deserve to know why. I am willing to accept religion as opart of a compromise, but I think other terms need to be included too. Fortunately, the Encyclopedia Judaica has a nice line that includes "religion" plus other terms that satisfy me, and this is a reliable source. Since your edit seemed basically just to add the word religion, and since my edit keeps the word religion, I hope you will not object. Slrubenstein | Talk 00:54, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
It seems like WP:CIVIL doesn't matter. I've noticed it many times before. It really hurt me when admins defended someone that kept on calling me a troll. Joe Chill ( talk) 01:33, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Do you have an online copy of David Weber's "A Mighty Fortress" that you could send me? Debresser (talk) 07:46, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm afraid I have never received or responded to a message in Wpedia, so I hope I am doing this right. I have a link to my fileshare, and a PDF of "A Mighty Fortress". Baen Books, Weber's publisher, operates a library site, where their authors can voluntarily post some or all of their books for free. These are the books David Weber has chosen to share, ten in all. I believe all of them are complete. I hope this helps.
Q: The treatment of Jews in "Mighty Fortress" is very complex - is that what inspires you to read it now?
http://www.box.net/shared/lgr4bj864c
http://www.baen.com/library/dweber.htm
Yours, ABEL
Salvagebar ( talk) 20:45, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Mea culpa. This is the link: http://www.box.net/shared/edxe2hnien The EPUB file has the images, maps, etc - you'll need an epub file reader, like Adobe Digital Editions to read it. The html file has the text. Salvagebar ( talk) 03:51, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I checked all pages that transclude {{ Cite ynprcn}} and non use the deprecated date fields (accessyear). I removed the tracking category. I guess you might be watching this template. – droll [chat] 21:46, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Hey Debresser: I started a discussion about the material in question on the talk page. Savant1984 ( talk) 01:25, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
this edit was over the line on personal attacks on the article talk page. Please discuss issues in a less confrontational and less abusive manner with other participants going forwards. Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 22:27, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
I have to warn you. You've reverted me three times in a row on Niddah. If you do it again, you'll be in violation of 3RR. This past time, you actually reverted my edit even though I gave a source. I really don't recommend that you revert it again. - Lisa ( talk - contribs) 22:43, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
It seems like Talk:Moses is a ghost town with dry winds and lots of empty space. Maybe you can stop by here and plant a few green thoughts to brighten the place up, when you have some time. If you know anyone else, it's now an open invite with the RfC posted. Thanks. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 02:21, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
I do not understand your comment here. I thought you did not want to change the hatnote. And here I am, saying the hatnote should not be changed. Yet now you seem to be disagreeing with me - does this mean that you now think the hatnote should be removed? If you agree with me that the hatnote should not be removed, why are you arguing? Or do you just like to argue for the sake of arguing?
If you actually do agree with me, which is what I expected, would you mind removing your comment? I ask because if we are in agreement it is only disruptive, the section is meant to discuss what to do with the history section, not the hatnote, and your adding this comment just derails the discussion. If you agree with my comment, you should have just inserted your comment right after mine, and something like "Agreed about the hatnote." That is all you need to say, I really do not understand your desire to argue.
Of course, if you actually have a comment on what this section is about, I would welcome that whether you do or do not agree with my proposal. Slrubenstein | Talk 10:57, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I hope it is clear to you that this is not what i am advocating. But the hatnote says that people should look to the other article for historical information. You seem to agree with that - yet THIS article has a whole section (7) on historical information! It seems only consistent and logical that it be moved to where we say it is, or the history article. I hope you will express your view on the actual issue 9if you have one), Slrubenstein | Talk 18:08, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
On your User Page you write that the death penalty should be used for certain crimes. I wonder what is your opinion of Schopenhauer's statement: "Those who would like to abolish it should be given the answer: 'First remove murder from the world, and then capital punishment ought to follow.' "? It appears in his The World as Will and Representation, Vol. II, Ch. 47 and is mentioned in the Wikipedia article on Schopenhauer, in the "Punishment" sub–section. Lestrade ( talk) 17:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)Lestrade
In the same chapter, he wrote: "It should be inflicted even for the definite attempt at murder, just as for murder itself; for the law's desire is to punish the deed, not to avenge the result." Lestrade ( talk) 17:43, 30 May 2010 (UTC)Lestrade
I have started Phase III and am in the process of breaking the help into separate pages, starting with the most prevalent errors. Please review and comment:
---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 14:04, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes I was going to drop you a note. I am quite pleased with the progress, most parameters can now be dropped altogether. Rich Farmbrough, 10:03, 31 May 2010 (UTC).
It is historic. Maybe the refresh button belongs somewhere else, or isn't needed. (I built the original to cope with all the varieties out there, so that I wouldn't get complaints about "features" vanishing. There's no reason it can't be simplified to some extent now.) Rich Farmbrough, 12:32, 31 May 2010 (UTC).
Why did you change "Jewish People" at the Judaism article? I think you were wrong to change what I wrote, and I changed it back. If you still do not understand why this is correct please let me know and we can discuss it, but please do not revert me. thanks. Slrubenstein | Talk 11:50, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Dude, you reverted my edit without discussion, Please stop projecting. Slrubenstein | Talk 20:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Dude, I gave my explanation, and you still have not responded to it - other than to revert me without discussion. Discussion takes two. I have provided my explanation. So who is edit warring? Slrubenstein | Talk 14:30, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
I am not going to make a big deal of it, but I really don't think you had a right to delete a talk page comment (I checked the guidelines), even if you considered it constructive.
I had made the comment mainly to learn two things:
If he was working with you, so I could adjust for that.
And to gain some insight into why I tend to get few responses. Mzk1 ( talk) 19:54, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
It's in my edit summary for the reversion and in the protection log. Punkox is a long-term block evader from Peru, generally editing with anonymous Peruvian IP addresses. Since he's defacto banned, I revert all of his edits. With the extremely long term evaders, I semi-protect any articles they touch.— Kww( talk) 05:57, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Sometimes vandals register as a way of getting around a protection, and I really wanted just to drive them away. But if you think a lower level would work, I will lower the protection, Slrubenstein | Talk 10:42, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Debresser: Because of your interest in this topic, you will hopefully be able to upgrade the Sholom Rubashkin article and add a balanced WP:NPOV to this important biography. You may also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sholom Rubashkin. Sincerely, IZAK ( talk) 16:34, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Regarding your note at my Talk, do whatever you please. I'm "retired", only log in very rarely to fix truly blatant vandalism. I don't know why you object to "loopback", and with all due respect I just don't care anymore. I served my time debating with editors who presume others understand their motivations, and am content I did my share. Pete St.John ( talk) 20:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Your name was on the 2nd dramaout signup and the organizer of the 2nd one suggested notifying those who signed up the last time. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:The_Great_Wikipedia_Dramaout/3rd#Participating_Wikipedians
and also a mention on WP:ANI. I would love to have you participate! Remember July 5th, the starting date! Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 15:14, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
...is very nicely organized and informative, one of the best I've seen. Well done!
שבת שלום, --
Deborahjay (
talk) 11:46, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
See here. I don't think there will be a problem having it deleted. I had planned to make a pass through the other templates in that category and either (a) refactor them to call {{ infobox character}} and/or (b) nominate them for deletion after replacement. There are just so many of them that it make take some time. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:56, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
OK.
First, the current text is from a critical-historiacal source, and says that the bride was purchased FROM THE FATHER. ALWAYS. This is in direct opposition to the traditional view. I meant to revise and quote the Gemara "Et Biti Natati".
Second the paragraph you removed is mostly sourced and and was in my original. You did not remove it then, please note. Of course it is POV, it is meant to balance.
Please explain. Mzk1 ( talk) 20:20, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
outdentIMHO the best thing would be to find an additional source, which should be more specific, and then attribute it as you indicated with specific mention of source. Debresser ( talk) 20:24, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
I moved the discussion "Should every BIO of a Jew be part of Wikiproject Judaism", which you recently participated in, to the talk page of WP Judaism's MOS. This is an important subject and needs to be incorporated into the MOS once we reach a consensus. -shirulashem (talk) 18:22, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Please read WP:3RR. More than three reverts in a single day and you may be blocked for a short while from editing. Bali ultimate ( talk) 09:16, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but WP:3RR and WP:EW clearly forbid the conduct you engaged in here.
Having a strong opinion in a content dispute and assuming bad faith about other contributors do not excuse edit warring, especially and particularly past the point of 3RR.
Please do not repeat this behavior. Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 21:25, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first. I'm a bit confused - my edit was to reverse the watering-down and apologetic edit by the IP. A Sniper ( talk) 16:42, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
To which your recent edits to the sandbox might, or might not, have interfered with this ongoing process on the talkpage. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 13:55, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Here's to you on your birthday, Debresser! From the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! |
Armbrust Talk Contribs 23:30, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi Debresser: A discussion and related vote you participated in is being reviewed at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#All talk pages, and more, were notified about the discussions and proposed moves. You may want to add your views to the ongoing discussion. Thank you, IZAK ( talk) 05:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Re. Template talk:Judaism#Template's width
Can you please follow up on this one re. the IP users request? I'm sure you'll understand my reasoning re. the {{editsemiprotected}}, and perhaps you can make the edit if/when appropriate? Cheers, Chzz ► 19:41, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
On the page for Spherical Harmonic, where I had the mathematics link that you changed, I was trying to set it up so the link would go to the section titled mathematical Fiction on the Asaro Wiki page. Do you know how to do that? All I could do was get it to go to the top of the Asaro page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.107.127.25 ( talk) 03:07, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Please see my note on the "Musar Literature" talk page. I'd make a case for adopting the former spelling on the Wikipedia page -- not just because there's no dagesh in the samech, but also because this is the way that academics spell the phrase. Thanks! Moreh405 ( talk) 03:40, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
I found you reverted my edits of SDPI article. Could you please tell me the reason for reverting the changes -- Indiashines ( talk) 02:31, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Dovid. I just came across Category:Templates for merging, which you created in October 2009. Its banner claims that, "this category contains templates which have been listed for deletion." However the category is in reality filled with more than 35,000 article pages. It doesn't really contain any templates (okay, it appears to contain exactly one, Template:Tfm-inline, plus two template/doc pages), or template messages (per the redirected link).
I'm inclined to take it over to CfD, but figured there must be something to this cat that I don't know about, so I thought I'd ask you and maybe Koavf (who just recently hid the category) about it first. What is this thing really? What's it do for us? I'm watching your page if you want to answer hereRegards, — JohnFromPinckney ( talk) 02:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
It's wonderful to be noticed. Thanks for the compliment at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 August 12#Template:Tfdnotice2! :-) -- Bsherr ( talk) 22:48, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello Rabbi Debresser! I worked on Template:Kabbalah, to its previous full format, but notice it has recently been collapsed and redesigned. What is your opinion of these last changes? I'm not necessarily fully against the collapsed format, especially if that is wikipedia policy, but have the following concerns:
Alternatively, if you think the non-collapsed format was better in principle, then tell me. I am automatically open to that view - a similar format, for example, to the Chabad template. If one can get away with it, I would actually far prefer it - I mainly go along with collapsing it, as I guess it's unlikely others would leave it like that, in view of likely wikipedia policy. However, I do wonder why the wikipedia community (rightly) leaves the Chabad template uncollapsed!
Whether or not all the entries merit inclusion within the template is a separate issue, but I notice that the Jewish philosophy template has a similar number of direct and contextualising entries. I sent a copy of this also to User talk:IZAK#Kabbalah template, in resonse to his compliment of the Jewish philosophy template, to see his opinion! What do you think? With best wishes April8 ( talk) 17:41, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
No problem. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 17:39, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Please explain I don't know why you reverted my edit to {{ Filmr}}; isn't it useful to have these in a tracking category? Please respond on my talk. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 18:28, 20 August 2010 (UTC
If you have a problem with the English that is fine however don't determine relevancy based on the number of Messianic Jews. Messianic Jews outnumber Karaites by a huge margine yet I bet you wouldn't maginalize the tzaddikim. I am reverting my addition to Posekem.(I didn't revert)
I apologize. Nor did I revert.
hehe I usually don't do big edits and oy, I've been doing that manually for like ever now it seems haha. -- Teacherbrock ( talk) 19:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I hate arguing, just isn't my cup of tea. I do small tweaks and edits. Every once in awhile I will throw in a paragraph or something. If it sticks it sticks, if it doesn't then, oh well. I've had my fair share of edit wars and I don't like them at all. :p -- Teacherbrock ( talk) 19:15, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Debresser: This is a kind reminder and request, that when you nominated Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Significance of numbers in Judaism, that as an experienced WPian by now, it would have been the correct protocol and courtesy to let the original creator User Xyz7890 ( talk · contribs) [6] know about it (wouldn't you want this done for you if it was the other way around?), per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#Notifying interested people:
{{subst:
AFDWarningNew|Article title}} ~~~~
{{subst:
AFDWarning|Article title}} ~~~~
{{subst:
Adw|Article title}} ~~~~
{{subst:
AFDNote|Article title}} ~~~~
You could and should have also listed it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism. Thank you very much! IZAK ( talk) 13:13, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
FYI Help:Cite errors#A page shows in the reference error category, but no cite errors show. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 13:29, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi-Just wanted to let you know that the reason why I put the noinclude tags into the directions was due to this problem at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vpt#.7B.7Btfm.7D.7D_help_needed . When someone didn't put the noinclude tags on the {{ see also category}} template, it was placing template pages that transcluded "see also category" into the "templates for merging" category, i.e., template:vandalism information was in there, because it transcludes template:see also category on its /doc pg. My thoughts were to remind editors to use the tags, so this doesn't happen, confusing everyone (including me!) to which template is supposed to be merged. Apparently, the transculsion problem only applies to template/doc pgs, and you can see at the templates for merging category, that there are numerous pages in there, that haven't been flushed out from before "see also category" had the tfm put inside of the noinclude tags. Is there a way to prevent the auto-categorization on transcluded template pages?? I know there has to be a code out there, somewhere! -- Funandtrvl ( talk) 20:10, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
#switch:{{PAGENAME}}
around the category, but I'm not familiar enough with {{
Tfm}} to be comfortable making the change myself. 「
ダイノガイ
千?!」
? ·
Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 20:38, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Howdy. When you create new cats for articles with dead ext. links, you may want to add some parameters to fix what is displayed.-- Rockfang ( talk) 07:53, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob ( talk) 23:32, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
You may be amused to know that these now nominate themselves for CSD when they are empty, and over a month old. Rich Farmbrough, 06:21, 24 September 2010 (UTC).
I have asked the maintainer of the uncategorized articles list to update the programming so that {{ uncategorized stub}} is recognized as being "tagged" — but until he actually does so, the issue is that {{ uncat}} gets an article off the "untagged" list, while "uncategorized stub" does not. I've been trying, more or less singlehandedly, to manage a backlog which was over 42,000 articles two months ago — and it simply doesn't help to have articles which are tagged with "uncategorized stub" reappearing on the list every day.
Please also be aware that while the categorization project certainly prefers that "uncategorized stub" be used instead if an article has a stub category, the rules explicitly state that "uncat" is also okay. The latter template isn't ideal, but it's not inappropriate or unacceptable either, as stub categories don't count toward an article being considered categorized. Bearcat ( talk) 16:19, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Good news...finally got the change implemented, so pages tagged with {{ uncategorized stub}} don't get listed as "untagged" anymore. So I can finally start using that template properly! (*grin*) Bearcat ( talk) 17:45, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
You should know better by now than to make threats [9] against others rather than engaging in constructive discussions. In light of your past violations of WP:NPA against me I ask you to either withdraw your threat or apologize. In the discussion at Talk:Breslov (Hasidic dynasty)#Dynasty vs "group" I have indicated that you have a history of this. To make it clear that you get this message I am re-posting it here for you: Debresser, your open threats violate WP:CIVIL (viz WP:THREATEN) and undermine WP:AGF as you now openly violate WP:NPA and WP:EQ rather than engage in constructive discussions that while they may be WP:BEBOLD are very necessary and legitimate. In all my years at WP I have always adhered to WP:NPOV in the creation and editing of articles and categories, I would have heard from others by now if this was an issue. On the other hand on talk pages I like to frankly discuss more issues. You have constantly refused to show any basic decency as you keep up your crass and vulgar insults, as you do here by insulting me yet again with allegations about "tendentious editing and wild accusations that have no connection with reality" as you have in the past, see (until January 2010) Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Chabad movement/Evidence#User:Debresser’s pro-Chabad POV editing and diffs, especially point 9 where you resort to: "violations of WP:NPA by repeatedly calling into question the "sanity" of the nominator: "mentally ill", [10], [11], inserts "FBI", [12], "Food for psychiatrists", [13], "insane ranting", [14], [15]." So what are you going to say, that you are "innocent" and anyone who disagrees with you is "guilty"? Your time would be better spent by involving yourself in the content of this discussion than by indulging your tendencies to do the wrong things. IZAK ( talk) 05:00, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Diamon Star CD cover.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{ non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk 05:09, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Just a head-up that Category:Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases and its subcategories have been listed for speedy renaming (for a minor punctuation fix). -- Pascal 666 07:14, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi Debresser: Could you point me to the place on WP where a broad "consensus" was reached to reduce the Mussar movement article by one "s" and make it into "Musar" since there is no record of any such discussion on the Talk:Musar movement page where it should have been or at least noted. I have started such a discussion at Talk:Musar movement#Musar or Mussar. Please contribute to that discussion (instead or running around making all sorts of wild threats against me, try positive discussions). Thanks, IZAK ( talk) 01:54, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
See:
Thanks, IZAK ( talk) 07:45, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi Debresser: Please stop removing the names of notable and even famous poskim without further discussion. Simply because some poskim may not be be known to one, is no grounds to wipe names off WP articles and lists without at least some discussion, perhaps even at WP:TALKJUDAISM. See Talk:Posek#Notable Poskim where this could be discussed now. Thanks, IZAK ( talk) 02:02, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Diamon Star CD cover.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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 22:53, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Slow but steady wins the race. — Robert Greer ( talk) 16:44, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Help please. Can you make it more balanced ? Posted plenty which should be relevant on talk page ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.122.113 ( talk) 03:12, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Sockpuppet engaged in countless edits overnite without any sources. Can you assist here and support my balanced edits. They dont comment or reply. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.122.113 ( talk) 11:17, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Can you please assist in reviewing Rabbi Pinto page ? There's very few Wiki editors versed in Judaism. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.112.21.194 ( talk) 10:35, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Template:Passive voice/doc, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:Passive voice/doc and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:Passive voice/doc during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Kumioko ( talk) 02:38, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Well mine wasn't a bad choice. Yours is just more exact :) -- User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 17:08, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello - I came across the page titled Jewish theology of love and thought that I might be able to help fix it. It was in pretty terrible shape, mostly consisting of a personal essay regarding Franz Rosenzweig. I tried reformatting the article a bit, especially by adding material from the Jewish Encyclopedia article on love. I left the material on Rosenzweig at the end of the article, though I think that this should probably be greatly condensed. Anyhow, I then saw that you had suggested the article should be deleted, which it probably should have been. Now that I've put some work into it, though, I'd like to think it may be salvageable. If at any point down the line you want to help me salvage that page, I'd appreciate the help. I also thought that maybe it should be retitled "Jewish views of love" rather than "Jewish theology of love," since not all relevant views might be "theological" in character. Lkjowa ( talk) 18:27, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Template:Expand has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. 134.253.26.6 ( talk) 22:44, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi, what is your opinion about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Chabad houses? IZAK ( talk) 04:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
How ugly. Only saying. Gwen Gale ( talk) 13:11, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Well, Nurse Echo, the issue of those meaningless "fame and fortune" names is resolved. Now, how to make the rest of that cast list more orderly and meaningful. Any thoughts? Drmargi ( talk) 13:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Is it time for an ANI for incivility on Tumadoireach? Drmargi ( talk) 07:28, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
ANI is apparently mostly for for death threats, racist attacks, threats of violence, legal threats and suchlike Drmargi -but you presumably already knew that. I have looked at it prompted by your mentioning it. One to bear in mind. Thanks for the info.-- Tumadoireacht ( talk) 14:23, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
I enjoyed you homepage/user page with all the colourful and informative lozenges about your interests and tastes. I must get around to learning how to do that.
Just a thought on the subject of taste; Civilian Palestinian, Gazan, or Lebanese editors or readers who have lost adult relatives or children to Israeli gunship helicopter invasions might find your humour on the subject offensive.
You may be unaware that sales of this helicopter to Israel were blocked recently by the USA over concerns about civilian deaths and its ongoing threat to Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip. "During the recent war, Israel made considerable use of the Longbow, and there were high civilian casualties in the Gaza Strip" per the Wikipedia article about the war use.
For those of us who have lost close ones to suicide it is never a subject for humour or mockery.
The assertion in the photo caption that the helicopter does its killing within Israel may be additionally problematic for obvious reasons concerned with territory definition and could be seen as additionally offensive.
Would you consider removing it either on the grounds of good taste or civil? After all civility really IS one of the five pillars of Wikipedia, unlike, say, Notability. The penguin photo, on the other hand is very funny.-- Tumadoireacht ( talk) 12:38, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Much as it pains me to agree with our aquatic friend, Debresser, I can see that this could be taken as Not Funny At All in some quarters. In the interest of WikiHarmony, would you please consider removing it? Thanks.-- SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 13:33, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Debresser. Near the bottom of your userpage, there is a statement "No, there was no connection between the lowest two banners in the "My facts and opinions" columns.". Just to let you know, the link is broken (I think it needs to be changed to link to User:Debresser#About myself). Regards. DH85868993 ( talk) 09:23, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi, a while back you asked this question [17] at WP:Stub querying why the guidance said that an extra blank line should be inserted after the categories and before the stub. I have read the ensuing discussion and it seemed like more editors agreed with you that there appeared to be limited justification for this, although the discussion did then get quite technical about asbox and CSS, and seemed to end with Rich Farmborough asking some 'asbox experts' about the ramifications. You chased things once but you do any further chasing beyond what's in the thread. You may be aware that the MoS has a link to your thread when justifying the use of the double line [18]. Regards. Eldumpo ( talk) 18:09, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello again. Thanks for making a post at AWB, although unfortunately there has been no further follow-up. Like yourself it seems, I often get irritated by the number of bot and tool edits to articles on my watchlist, most of which are very minor and cosmetic, and some of which may have no basis to be made at all e.g. the double white space issue. Another issue came up for me today regarding a 'dash script' and I posted a thread at [20]. You can see that my queries are raising wider questions on the use of bots and tools in a more integrated way, and you can see a response was made suggesting raising the issue at Village Pump. The recent responses on this I've made have tended to be at the technical bot users themselves rather than wider comment, so perhaps it would be useful to try and obtain further views. I was wondering if you'd sought any wider input on this before, and whether VP or something like RfC is the best start? Regards. Eldumpo ( talk) 17:24, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for yours corrections in User:Genevieve2/sandbox08. I hope you have a Shabbat with happiness, peace and serenity. Shabbat Shalom. אני אוהב אותך -- Geneviève ( talk) 12:07, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the compliment. Yea, those categories are only populated by templates, and they are pretty convoluted because they seem to add articles to multiple categories, and many template populate one of the categories making this category overpopulated. I am not savvy with the documentation, so I hope my brute work can help the cleaning. Bernolákovčina ( talk) 17:17, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Bernolákovčina ( talk) 17:43, 15 January 2011 (UTC)The Manual of Style (often abbreviated MoS or MOS) is a style guide for Wikipedia articles that encourages editors to follow consistent usage and formatting
with my deepest fellow regard and hope that we can continue to learn from each other --— Tumadoireacht Talk/ Stalk 10:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 23:31, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Debresser,
as to your first question (why I added the no definition template), there's not much more to say than: There was no definition :-) I read the introduction and still had no idea what a parlement was, only what it developed out of. That's why I added the template. As to your second question (whether your definition is correct): I have no idea -- if I'd known what a parlement is, I would have added a definition myself :-)
Thanks for adding a definition -- it makes the article much more intelligible to me. A further improvement would be to blend the first sentence with the definition into the opening paragraph -- as it stands, the following sentence is partly redundant.
Joriki ( talk) 00:55, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
I did have chance to take part in the discussion on Template talk:R from other template before you moved templates and categories that I was watching. Please do not move things like that without a proper discussion at CFD or TFD, especially if the small discussion that did take place was not even on the talk page of a page that was moved. McLerristarr | Mclay1 15:32, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
"That is no reason to remove a useful link. Why are you trying to own these template?" I'm not trying to own the templates. "What links here" counts any redirect page with a link as a redirect to that link. Redirect pages weren't designed to have extra text on them but then someone (not me) decided they should. If you look at the "What links here" page of WP:UBX (the redirect page), every page that has Template:R to userbox template transcluded on it is counted as a redirect to WP:UBX. To avoid this, it's easy to just not put links on redirects. There's already a link the category page, which should provide more information than the template and can contain any helpful links. McLerristarr | Mclay1 04:53, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
See
User_talk:Rich_Farmbrough#SmackBot:_spacing_before_stub_tags.
Rich
Farmbrough, 20:29, 5 February 2011 (UTC).
You reverted my change here saying there was no discussion. The reason you didn't see my discussion here was probably because it got archived by MisraBot II here.
In light of this information, would you be willing to undo your revert? — Stepheng3 ( talk) 04:58, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
I really don't understand how it is edit warring on my behalf. Another user has been putting inaccurate maps of Armenia, and I've been changing them as a result. I'm only protecting the integrity of the article. The map that I am putting up puts Armenia in a Europe context, which is very accurate as politically Armenia is aligned with Europe. Second, the similar sized and positioned Caucasian countries (Georgia and Azerbaijan) all have this pro Europe map, and I really don't understand why Armenia should be any different. It too like them is aligned with Europe politically. One must understand that this is not a geographic map, but a political one, and political is supposed to show with what part of the world the country in question is politically aligned. So, I am not the one at fault here, it this other user (Kentronhayastan) that is changing the map into something wrong. I will not rest until this is properly resolved, as I don't want inaccurate maps representing my country. MosMusy ( talk) 22:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your assistance, by the way, are you also Jewish? HaYehudi 18:54, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
The article Erewhon (Honorverse) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Sadads (
talk) 02:08, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Can't seem to find the ANI on Mclay1, not from my link, Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Mclay1, nor in the archives. Was it moved? withdrawn? — Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX ) 03:10, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Never mind, I found it. — Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX ) 20:55, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Erewhon (Honorverse) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is not nominated for speedy deletion, it is a proposed deletion. As such, per WP:PROD, if you wish to contest deletion, just delete the deletion tag. As it's been up on PROD for a few days, deletion tag expiry will occur before your one-week deadline on merger occurs. So the closing admin may choose to delete the article at that time. It'd be easier if you just removed the PROD tag. 65.93.15.125 ( talk) 04:41, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Just wrote this up to say you have an excellent page Dovid, and glad to see a brother on wikipedia. I've taken a few tips from your page and edited my own. I'm very happy now with mine. Yours is very inspiring and well-organized. I had all of my userbox(es) in the Babel box before tonight lol. Hope your Purim is great "next month" (Gregorian-wise), I'm really looking forward to it.-- Smart30 ( talk) 09:15, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, sorry for the late reply. Please read the discussion before accusing me of edit warring and threatening to get be blocked. The original map was the orthographic projection, in use for about a year, and on all other language Wikipedia articles of Armenia. MosMusy decided to change the map without starting a discussion, and I reverted it back and asked for a discussion. Yet he continuously changed it back without coming to a mutual understanding with me. In other words, he began an edit war. Now that we have come to a consensus, I accept it (in fact, I even made the Europe map that we're using now, just to show that I wasn'T simply biased toward the orthographic projection). Kentronhayastan ( talk) 16:00, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Should I remove William Allen Simpson's addition now? Honestly, it seems to me like five people disagreeing with all or part of his one-man consensus addition is enough to remove it (only one other person, retroactively, appears to agree with it). All Hallow's Wraith ( talk) 06:40, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Typically I think breaks are frequently needed, especially when dealing with two or more portals, because I don't want the portal boxes to spill into the References/Notes sections. Remember that not everybody uses the same monitors, so what doesn't spill over on one monitor spills over on another. WhisperToMe ( talk) 23:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to turn your attention to two users, dbachmann and moreschi that have barged in and been changing the Armenia map, and other things in addition. Let me remind you that this issue had already been resolved and everything was going fine, until these people showed up. Given they are only pushing these changes for Armenia, I am rather suspicious of their intentions. MosMusy ( talk) 17:13, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
I find your comment rather depressing, Debresser. You ask me to do a "proper discussion" of the question? Then I should wonder what, in your opinion, I have done instead. You will note, if you care to look at the talkpage, that I have discussed the issue, based on references, which is the entire point of this project. While, otoh, all MosMusy has done is yell at me in boldface and ignore the point. So I am not sure what you think a " discussion" is supposed to look like, but it certainly bears no resemblance to anything I would consider worthy of a project to build an encyclopedia. May I remind you that this isn't a forum, or a social community? If MosMusy has any kind of case to make, let him do that. But that is of course an academic point, as it is crystal clear that he does not. -- dab (𒁳) 19:50, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Prove to me that Armenia is politically not part of Europe and thus does not belong in the context of Europe. Prove to me why Georgia and Azerbaijan deserve Europe context maps, but Armenia deserves a middle east/asian map. The South Caucasus as a whole, deserve a Europe context map as that's where their sphere of influence, especially politically lies. MosMusy ( talk) 20:10, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
lol, this user now came to my talkpage claiming that he is replacing the map because "Armenia is politically Europe". I invite you to google the width and depth of the internets for this insight: "Armenia is politically Europe". Oh yes, are two hits for it! Oh wait, they are google's cache of MosMusy's comment at Talk:Armenia plus one mirror. Talk about abusing Wikipedia to push your personal opinion as WP:TRUTH.
But perhaps MosMusy was trying to say that "Armenia is politically in Europe" and is simply a little grammatically challenged? Let's "write for the enemy" and assume that's what he was trying to say. "Armenia is politically in Europe". Oh yeah! The wide, wide internet has one (1) occurrence of this statement. This deep and encyclopedic truth has been uttered by "Lord Mov" at twcenter.net/forums/ on April 12, 2010, 02:30 PM. It goes without saying that this discovery trumps our pathetic references, such as the UN, the CIA, and OUP, and clearly establishes that MosMusy is not only right, he is a gleaming gem of encyclopedic expertise, well worthy to be pampered with our full range of Wikipedia:Expert retention measures. -- dab (𒁳) 09:21, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only 5 minutes. cooldenny ( talk) 18:28, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
You should read WP:MOSDAB, what you did adding the material now sourced is contraindicated by that. Moreover, you are labeling the various Pincus named people as bearing an Ashkenazic Jewish surname; does your labeling meet our standards of categorization of people and of WP:BLP. No, it falls well short. You have no sources that all those people bear that name, any more than one may assume anyone surnamed Lee is Korean (Robert E. Lee would be surprised for example were he alive). You should check your edits to make sure you comply with the consensus about how pages should look, what they should contain, and what they shouldn't. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 18:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
The construction of Judaism as an Ethnic origin is partially rooted in anti-semetic ideology. Individuals may become Jewish, by deciding to observe Judaism. Primo Levi was a scientist, was not an observant Jew, he was labelled ethnically by the Nazi's as a Jew, and was persecuted for their unfounded belief in Judaism as an Ethnicity. He was born in Italy to Italian parents, spoke Italian, has the potential to have family history residing in Italy since Roman times. By simply refering to him as a Jew removes his equally important identity as an Italian which the Nazi Germans were able to effectively remove from him. As for it being a well known fact, Ethnicity is not something that is firmly rooted in scientific empiricism. With this said, placing Primo in this artificial category passively conveys an affirmation with Nazi-german ideology pertaining to eugenics. If you wish to describe his Jewish culture, I suggest adding another hearder, or adjusting this header. Leaving Ethnicity: Jewish in a web source where the ignorant go to learn about things, you are perpetuating an "truth" that is rooted in racist, Nazi ideology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.60.154 ( talk) 05:10, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
You've misread the WP:Manual of Style (biographies): 2. Ethnicity or sexuality should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability. Similarly, previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability. Please self-revert.
Further, if you can quote a manual of style, you certainly could be expected to know how to use a talk page. Please keep that in mind. Jd2718 ( talk) 18:12, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Related: I think the Belarussian in the lead needs to go, esp. the claim that this is his original name. The Russian clearly should stay. Yiddish probably needs to be added - but I am neither capable of finding the correct spelling nor typing it on WP. I see you have some level of knowledge of Yiddish. Can you help, or perhaps find someone who can? (I've written the same comment and request on the article's talk page) Jd2718 ( talk) 18:20, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Why is Category:Medieval Jews in Palestine "misleading"? Were there no Jews in Palestine during the medieval era?! Chesdovi ( talk) 11:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Instead of telling me to wait for consensus, I advise you to hold your horses yourself. It will save us both a lot of time. Chesdovi ( talk) 20:18, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
"Editor seems blinded by some POV pushing of the term Palestinian, that he forgets the guy was Jewish". Being Palestinian and Jewish is not an oxymoron. Stop your rampage or face the consequences. Chesdovi ( talk) 22:54, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
That was a bad edit. You removed Palestinian and replaced it with Jewish in a flagrant act of censorship to suit you own irrational POV. Why do you insist on removing the fact that Jews who lived in Palestine can not be referred to as Paletinian? I have not got a satisfactory answer from you. This is how many sources refer to such people. Why cannot we not use this designation? You refuse to do so even with a source! Are you anti-Palestinian? Explain yourself once and for all. Are you some fanatic zionist who doesn't want to mention the word Palestine? What is it with you. Chesdovi ( talk) 01:34, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Debresser and Chesdovi are both topic banned from Israeli / Palestinian topic areas for 72 hrs due to disruptive editing and edit warring, with a healthy dose of personal attacks and incivility thrown in. This sanction is enacted under the Arbcom case sanctions and will be so logged.
Please DO NOT CONTINUE this behavior after the 72 hr ban is over. Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 03:19, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
As you apparently were not previously warned...
As a result of an arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, broadly understood. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad editing restrictions, described here and below.
These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.
Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary.
This notice is only effective if given by an uninvolved administrator and logged here. Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 07:42, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
You claim that the Holy Land was not called "Palestine" during the 13th cent. or is referred to by that term nowadays. Please give the common english name of what the region was called during the 13th-century (1200-1299CE). Chesdovi ( talk) 14:30, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Well i'll take that as a clear answer that you now CONCEED that the AREA WAS KNOWN AS PALESTINE IN THE 1200'S since you did not address this at all in your previous response, but decided to change the subject. Now the next problem: Who gives you the wiki RIGHT to expalin to ME what the paramenters for Rabbis of X cats are. Are you an expert on this? I don't have a wiki doctorate on it. Maybe you do? The sources are literally STACKED against you. DO YOU NOW CONCEDE THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE OF YOU FORCING YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT BELONGS WHERE OVER MINE? Chesdovi ( talk) 16:01, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
I have populated many rabbis according to their rightful regional designations without any fuss for years. Ottoman rabbis, German rabbis, Catalan rabbis, English rabbis, Syrian rabbis, Iraqi rabbis, Bohemian rabbis, etc. I created Category:French Tosafists, Category:American Haredi rabbis, etc, etc. Why has my inuition now been the center of contention? It is some extreme political POV issue. Accept that fact. Have you noticed how only you and SD have been involved? Does that not say something? You keep on going on about the "community". One right-wing zionist and another right-wing pro-palestinian. Sure both content these cats for differeing issues, but can you not see how both of you are seriously impeded by your POV? For you to go ahead and depopulate so many pages without agreement is seriously problematic. If it turns that that you have anything to do with Pallomine who finihed off your grand job of depopulating Palestinian categories, that will be the end of you here. Chesdovi ( talk) 14:40, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
If I feel the word is jusified I WILL ADD IT and continue to do so until you and I come to a soltion which is accepatble to both of us. Not one enforcing his view of what is just or not on the other, which you appear intent on doing. Chesdovi ( talk) 16:38, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Since you are under a topic ban, perhaps it would be best if you didn't post a message concerning the topic at WT:JUDAISM. Just a suggestion. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 22:08, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Even after Chesdovi's edit, it still says "Palestinian rabbi and Jewish mystic". (Nevertheless, I just reverted it as redundant, because the sentence ends "in Ottoman Palestine".) Maybe I should have been clearer. I was speaking about the subject of your dispute at ANI—I don't have a preference concerning the categories. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 22:36, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
You gave 3 reasons why the Palestinian rabbis category is not worthy here: Q1)The fact that somebody is a rabbi in a country does not mean he has the local nationality, especially since many (or even most) of them were not born there. A1)It seems from the sources that this very issue of residence does confer identity (or nationality) with a given region. We have Menachem Lonzano who was born abroad, yet upon living in Palestin, is called by RS Palestinian. Q2)There is too much confusion with the term Palestine being an ethnicity and not a geographical location. A2)This concern can be dismissed since the category is under the parent category which lists the nationality of Rabbis. Secondly, with all rabbis being of Jewish ethnicity, there can be no confusion about their ethnicity if they are being linked with a regional nationality. Would Ottoman Jews be a problem, lest we think they are Turkish and not Jewish? Should we not categorise Category:American rabbis as we may be confused to think they are descended from red indians? Q3)During the 13th century, the place was definitely not called Palestine. A3) That is an myth. And as you did not respond to my previous post about this I take you you now conceed there was. Chesdovi ( talk) 22:34, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
I think I discern some anti-zionism in your edits, especially your last one. I would find it interesting to discuss that with you, completely regardless of our disagreement. Debresser ( talk) 23:17, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
If I understand you correctly you think that Chabad sees the State of Israel as lechatchila? Debresser ( talk) 23:20, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Why do you say that the establishment of Jewish selfgovernment is against halakha? Debresser ( talk) 23:23, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Really file an appeal at WP:AE. At ANI, you will probably just be continuously ignored in the house style of skimming over WP:TLDR back-and-forths between two editors. Tijfo098 ( talk) 21:18, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Since "a synagogue is always for Jews, formost locals, but actually any Jew from over the world can come and pray there", shall we removed the reference to "Syrian" in this article? Chesdovi ( talk) 12:21, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Debresser. What to do next? I have just left this message on Chesdovi's talk page. Please advise: "You recently created Category:Judean rabbis a few days ago in spite of warnings not to create such categories that have brought you into the midst of editorial conflicts with other users and in spite of a number of related CfDs and calls for discussions about this subject at Category_talk:16th-century_Palestinian_rabbis#Rfc and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism#Rabbis categories for renaming. You are violating WP:CONSENSUS and the terms of the warnings that were issued to you recently, see User talk:Chesdovi#ARBPIA 72 hr topic ban. Please cool it, or further sanctions against you will be requested. Thank you," IZAK ( talk) 19:24, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Please do not add unsourced content, as you did to Yitzchak Ginsburgh. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 13:14, 22 May 2011 (UTC)