User talk:Deon/Archives/2009/April

Message from IP 75.187.62.205

hello, you sent me a message about my editing of the "government of gaza" page. I *did* state that Hamas is a terrorist organization, which is a factual edit. Saying the hamas is democratically elected is a misnomer. The hamas was elected to fill a majority of the assembly seats for the whole of the palestinian territories. Their election mandate did NOT cover the violent overthrow of the rest of the elected government of gaza. Nor did it invalidate the democratically elected President, Mahmoud Abbas. What happened in Gaza is a classic Coup, which is inherently *not* democratic of any nature whatsoever.

kind regards, Don Clements april 3, 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.187.62.205 (talk) 19:19, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm really not interested in foreign politics as a person. I have had a look at the page, and Hamas seems to indicate that only Canada, the EU, Israel, Japan and the US see it as a terrorist organisation. Other countries (Australia, UK, etc) only recognise the military wing of Hamas as a terrorist organisation. I'm no guru when it comes to politics, but it appears as though Hamas was elected, and therefore the sentence about them being elected should stay. You should not have removed the fact that they were elected to say they are a terrorist organisation: (1) They were elected, (2) We don't have a definite agreement on whether they are a terrorist organisation or not. I suggest you bring it up at Talk:Governance of the Gaza Strip, which is the discussion page for the article, and see what other editors think. Cheers. — Deon555^talk_{I'm BACK!} 06:58, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I appreciate your honest response, but I think it is obvious that hamas was elected to be the majority party in the Palestinian assembly, they were not elected to militarily overthrow the rest of the democratically elected government. I think there is not one person who would define "democratically elected" this way. My first edit may have been one sided, so my subsequent edit reflected *both* facts of hamas...their election and their subsequent coup...these are facts that, I believe, wiki requires to be an honest source of information

regards, Don —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.187.62.205 (talk) 16:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. If you can find a happy medium, that's great. The edit looks good. Two more things, now that you're getting into editing, might I recommend you create an account? It only takes a few seconds, and you need not supply any personal information. This page explains the other benefits of creating an account. The second thing, it's always a good idea to sign your posts on a talk page so people know who said what (see WP:SIGN). You probably noticed that a bot came along and signed your post for you, just try it out for yourself next time. When you've finished typing, just place four tildes after your post like this: ~~~~ . If there's anything else you need, don't hesitate to drop back :). Cheers, and have a great day — Deon555^talk_{I'm BACK!} 06:27, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Names at HelpDesk

Thnx, Deon555. I think one paragraph in the naming conventions (No established usage) shed light on this. KapHorn (talk) 11:26, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

No worries mate, have a good one. — Deon555^talk_{I'm BACK!} 11:39, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

missed it

I accidentally missed it :P JMM|Whatup!? 05:53, 8 April 2009 (UTC)