User talk:Gidonb/Archive 2006

Archive 1 (December 2003 to December 2005 - long!) Archive 2 (December 2005 to June 2006 - very long!)

Please leave civilized messages in any major language originating from Eurasia. Answers will usually be in English. If the discussion is ongoing elsewhere, or more relevant to an article's talk page, please consider just leaving a note drawing my attention to that page. I am flexible: your page, my page, talk page, whatever is more relevant or suits you best. However, please do not post the same message twice. I look forward to your communication!

Wikipedia Help

Hello, sir. You are very welcome for the grammar correction, and I thank you for your profference of aid. I'm not sure how much major Wikipedia I can do during this busy time in my junior year, but whenever I see something I can make better, I try. Thank you once again; I'll be sure to come to you if I have any trouble. I'm not sure if this is the proper way to "User talk", but hey, I tried. :)

Mcjsfreak07 03:37, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Netherlands embassy move

Could you please provide a reference? I do not recall any such move... I could be wrong. elpincha 23:16, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Sure. One moment. gidonb 23:23, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

This source quote that it were 13 embassies had moved [1], I only remember it from the time it happened. More follows. gidonb 23:28, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

OK. Waiting. Just make sure the source says whence and whither. See my other comments in Talk Tel Aviv. elpincha 23:31, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

OK here you go: Van der Klaauw is de Nederlandse parlementaire geschiedenis in gegaan als de minister die, nadat Begin had besloten Oost-Jeruzalem officieel te annexeren, onder druk moest besluiten de Nederlandse ambassade van Jeruzalem naar Tel Aviv te verhuizen. "Evenals de andere landen erkenden wij die annexatie niet, maar Nederland had de pech als één van de weinige landen een ambassade in Jeruzalem te hebben. Alleen de ambassade van Costa Rica zat er en die van nog wat andere Zuid-Amerikaanse landen. De Arabische landen dreigden de relaties met Nederland te verbreken indien onze ambassade in Jeruzalem zou blijven. Uiteindelijk heb ik in de verhuizing toegestemd, toen ook de Veiligheidsraad een resolutie in die zin aannam. Overigens is één en ander in goed overleg gegaan met de toenmalige Israelische ambassadeur Ronn. Hij wist hoeveel moeite ik met die beslissing had". source - forelast paragraph

Automatic Babel translation (I can do this better, but the gest gets through...): Of of the Klaauw the Dutch parliamentary history has gone in as a minister who, after Oost-Jeruzalem had decided annex beginning officially, had decide the Dutch embassy of Jerusalem move under very nasty tel of Aviv. As well as the other countries did not recognise we that annexation, but the Netherlands had to have the breakdown as an one of weinige the countries embassy in Jerusalem. Only the embassy of Costa Rica zat of it and that still what other South American countries. The Arab countries threatened the relations with the Netherlands break if our embassy in Jerusalem would remain. Eventually I have agreed in the removal, then also the Security Council in that sense adopted a resolution. Moreover one and other one in good consultation has gone with the then Israelische ambassador Ronn. He knew how much effort I with that decision had. It may have been already early eighties by then. Cheers, gidonb 23:37, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Good boy. Now maybe you should add the link to the main article to make it revert-proof. Happy 2006. elpincha 23:41, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Sure. I hope links in Dutch are not removed. Happy New Year! gidonb 23:46, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Got it. See here. The embassies transferred from Jm to TA after the passage of the 1980 "Basic Law, Jerusalem" act and a Security Council resolution. So it was not the 1970s... Could you kindly make the change in the main article and cite the source? Looks like this is the website that the Irish revertmeister was looking for... and it does not state what he states it states. Sigh. elpincha 23:47, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi Elpincha, as can also be understood from the interview with Van der Klauw, certainly for the Netherlands it was the early eighties. Probably for all. Thanks for verifying this fact and coming up with the citation of Israeli Foreign Affairs. Countries that still have their embassies in Jerusalem get most of their oil from Columbia and the area. As I was mostly engaged in keeping the issue constrained to its deserving proportions, I had no conflict with Jtdirl. I now really must take my break. Gracias et adios! gidonb 00:23, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Léon-Bernard Giot

No I do not know him so I would recommend if you feel that the article in question has POV issues then mark it {{POV}} and let people who know the subject better get to work on it.
:) I created that because it was listed as an Article for Creation and we a similar article in the NL language already. No other reason. -- SusanLarson ^{(User Talk, New talk, Contribs)} 00:13, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Went ahead and POV'd it for you -- SusanLarson ^{(User Talk, New talk, Contribs)} 00:21, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. gidonb 10:39, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categorization

Thanks for your note. I'm not terribly familiar with the use of categories and would welcome your advice or pointer to a suitable explanatory article. --Ian Pitchford 18:47, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

My pleasure. See for example Wikipedia:Categorization of people and related articles in the Wikipedia namespace. For example, when a person is an "Antartican criminal" he is by the virtue of this categorization already an "Antartican person", as all criminals are persons. Regards, gidonb 19:13, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see! That's perfectly clear. --Ian Pitchford 21:01, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Great! And please keep up the good work. Cheers, gidonb 21:14, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Are you really on a Wikivacation?

Your user page says you are. If not, could you please e-mail me at Jayjg99 (at) gmail.com? Jayjg ^(talk) 19:32, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

User:Gidonb/Affairs/Language of the Middle East conflicts

Hi, did you accidentally place this page in the main space? Shawnc 13:50, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi Shawnc, yes apparently I did *blush*. Thank you the moving and the recognition in the edit summary that it was a mistake! Can you also remove the copy with the typo in a sec? Regards, gidonb 13:55, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

No problem, these things happen to everyone! Unfortunately I'm not a admin (yet) but I did take the liberty and copied it to your userspace and fixed the linking tags, if that's ok with you. :-) Shawnc 13:58, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Be sure to tell me when you run for office! ;-) gidonb 13:59, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Western Sahara

Hi, I see that you reverted my last edit in the WS portal. Western Sahara is a territory disputed between Morocco and Polisario, each side has its own arguments which they think suffiscient, the UN is trying now to resolve the problem through a referundum. First of all, the problem is about neutrality of WP, the flag shown in the portal page is the flag used by one party of the conflict (polisario) and refused by the other (Morocco) and not recognized by the UN (the mediator in this conflict). There was an edit conflict about the flag in the Western Sahara page between me in one side and Koavf and Arre in the other, a survey was necessary and the results are here and here. The "no flags" option seems to be the least controversial solution, 2 flags was the second choice and the one flag options was the worst choice, can you explain me your point please? Daryou 20:01, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

As I understand NPOV the flag needs to be a flag that refers to the territory per se, not of a country with a dissimilar jurisdiction (even if it exercises control over most of the territory). However, if the territory is separately defined in the Moroccan framework and has a separate flag as such, that flag can be added. No flag is also valid, but I think we should not give up hope yet on NPOVing the Western Sahara articles. gidonb 20:14, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

The flag that I see is the flag used by one party of the conflict (polisario) and refused by the other (Morocco), displaying this flag reflects polisario's POV and is biased because of pro-polisario and anti-Moroccan stance, the Moroccan flag in that case will reflect the Moroccan POV (WS being an integral part of Morocco). However I'm not against a NO FLAGS option in this page, what do you think? Daryou 20:32, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I assume Morocco and Moroccans have hard feelings over some of Polisario's actions and therefor have negative emotions towards this flag. I can understand that. However, the flag is used by other parties than Polisario as the flag of Western Sahara. I do not know any other flag specific to this territory. Do you? I just told you what I think about the no flags option. I believe we should strive for NPOV even if emotionally this is difficult. See also the article linked to affairs at my user page. Regards,gidonb 20:47, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I understand your reasoning, however WP is first of all an organ of information not of moral jugement, WP is supposed to be neutral and unbiased, displaying this flag is pro-polisario biased. Are you saying that WP should take a pro-polisario stance just because you don't know any other flag specific to the territory? I don't think so. And what do you think about the survey that I linked above? Daryou 21:08, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi Daryou, I already answered your first point, because it was also raised in your previous posting. I believe we are not neutral and unbiased enough. I will cast my vote in due time, if the survey will still be running. Thank you for referring me. Regards, gidonb 21:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi, actually the survey is already closed, thank you for your opinion, best regards. Daryou 21:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes I picked that up in the meantime. gidonb 21:29, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Actually neutrality according to WP:NPOV is "to present ideas and facts in such a fashion that both supporters and opponents can agree", in the same page you can also read "Wikipedia is a general encyclopedia, which means it is a representation of human knowledge at some level of generality. But human beings disagree about specific cases; for any topic on which there are competing views, each view represents a different idea of what the truth is, and insofar as that view contradicts other views, its adherents believe that the other views are false and therefore not knowledge. Where there is disagreement about what is true, there's disagreement about what constitutes knowledge. Wikipedia works because it's a collaborative effort; but, while collaborating, how can we solve the problem of endless "edit wars" in which one person asserts that p, whereupon the next person changes the text so that it asserts not-p?". This flag isn't accepted by one party of the conflict and by then isn't neutral, even if it is "widely" used by pro-polisario sources. Thank you very much. Daryou 20:42, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Your focus is again on the conflict between Morocco and Polisario. The focus of the articles on Western Sahara however is on the territory itself, not on this or that conflict. Stronger, if by chance Polisario supporting and Moroccan POV pushers did make this the main focus, we need to make sure that the articles will be NPOVed. The conflict is one of many dimensions of this territory, among which its population, its history, its physical features, its economy and its cultures. The territory has one and only flag, that is widely quoted, and therefor it is totally NPOV to show it. No rights whatsoever are attached to the acknowledgement that this is the Western Saharan flag. Also the fact that the government of one country in the world does not like this flag is hardly relevant in this case, as it is a minority position. You can also look that up in our guidelines. If the article is about the conflict itself, however, than the Moroccan POV carries much more weight as implied by the quote above. gidonb 21:13, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you, the conflict is't the most important thing about WS. But when we are talking about the flag, the conflict has all its importance.

About minority, SADR isn't recognized by the UN but only by 45 states (over 192) from the third world. The UN doesn't recognize this flag. The position of one country in the world (Morocco) is relevant because it's a party of the conflict.

Using this unique flag of the territory isn't at all NPOV because it reflects a pro-polisario and an anti-Moroccan stance. Daryou 22:15, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

It is not a pro-Polisario statement as the flag is used wider than only Polisario. It is used exclusively for this territory. Compare with using the PLO flag for the Palestinian authority or the partially recogized Palestinian state that did not take off yet. Nobody claims that this flag should not be used because of the conflict between the PLO and Israel. gidonb 23:58, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

There is a major difference, Morocco claims WS as an integral part of its territory, Israel doesn't claim West bank and Gaza as a part of its territory. Israel doesn't refuse the Palestinian flag. Mrocco refuses the SADR flag, by then using this flag is anti-Moroccan and reflect a WP pro-polisario stance in the conflict. Daryou 15:35, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you, this flag is widely used as the flag of WS because there is a general confusion between WS (a disputed territory) and SADR (the self proclaimed Republic), the sources using this flag are either pro-polisario or ill-informed. The SADR isn't recognized by the UN and 147 states (over 192) neither is its flag. The conflict is under UN mediation, untill it's resolved, WP should be unbiased without any pro-polisario or pro-Moroccan stance. Daryou 17:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

You return every time to your thesis that the flag is pro-Polisario and anti-Morrocan but as evident from the wide use of this flag for Western Sahara this is not correct. To dismiss this use as ill-informed seems not very serious. gidonb 18:30, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Using this flag is YES or NO anti-Moroccan? Daryou 18:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Neither. It is only a symbol of a territory. gidonb 18:38, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

You say that this flag is the symbol of this territory. Well, to be honest, I think that you are a little bit ill-informed. If it is an unbiased symbol of this territory, why doesn't it flow over most of the territory (Moroccan controlled parts)? Why does the Moroccan flag flow over every court, office and school in the territory? Daryou 19:38, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

When I got to my library I never wonder why I see the flag of the US and not of Illinois. We, that is Illinois, are a populous state, one out of 50 that actually make up our federation. No we all agree that Western Sahara is not a state, it is not a Moroccan province, it is a territory with borders that are crossed by at least the provinces above. So why do you wonder that Moroccan schools in this territory do not show its flag? What does it prove? That there is harsh sentiment in Morocco towards Polisario and therefor they are unhappy with this widely accepted symbol for the Western Sahara? We agreed on that. It does not disprove however that this is the only flag of the territory, used by many others but Polisario in and outside WS. If you would like to call them all ill-informed, that is fine. That is your personal POV. gidonb 20:01, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

You said that "there is harsh sentiment in Morocco towards Polisario and therefor they are unhappy with this widely accepted symbol for the Western Sahara". Daryou 20:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Right, the flags of Polisario and Western Sahara are identical. Just like the PLO flag for the Palestinian Authority and the little recognized state of Palestine. gidonb 20:26, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

You are completely wrong, the flag of SADR isn't the flag of Western Sahara. The flag of SADR isn't recognized by the UN and by 147 countries (80% of the countries of the world) Daryou 16:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

It is the only flag of the Western Sahara, officially recognized by all others and widely used to reference to Western Sahara in many of the 80%. I see that you have resolved the issue and would like to congratulate you both on that fact. gidonb 01:35, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Yom Kippur War

I've more than clearly explained why Yom Kippur War is a POV title. Just because you don't agree doesn't automatically mean that the title is disputed; in fact the debate on the page has several others agreeing with me that it is POV, so there is an OBVIOUS dispute.

Unless you can explain better why you removed the POV template, I will replace it later this evening. Unfocused 22:03, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Well you did witin minutes after writing this. Since this is not personal, I will continue the discussion on the talk page. I found a document on the Egyptian Information Service that used the phrase Yom Kippur War. You never reacted at the page. gidonb 22:47, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

In the meantime, the adding of the POV tag to this page as against WP-procedures was undone by another editor. Is he also part of what you refer to as "Jewish POV"? I suggest that you will comply with our rules and stop using terms that really do not belong here. This would definitely make the communal work on this project more pleasant for everyone. gidonb 16:12, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Burger Ranch (Portugal)

You tagged this a speedy deletion candidate as well as copyvio with the reason being, "this article was creating while infringing my rights under GNU/FDL." Sorry, can you explain what you mean by this? I've removed both the deletion and copyright tags for the time being. howcheng {chat} 23:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello Howcheng, someone made a mess in the articles: Burger Ranch, Burger Ranch. Two articles were created dumping texts with no respect for official names and edit histories. After I saw the solution of User:Antaeus Feldspar for the Israeli firm, I applied the same solution to the Portugese firm. Regards, gidonb 03:44, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Netherlands fight

I'm having trouble figuring out what the argument is about specifically. From what I'm reading on the talk page it sounds like an argument over whether or not the sky is blue or turqouise. Tomer^talk 14:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Hahaha. I have explained the issue on the talk page. Thank you for your readiness to look into this issue! Regards, gidonb 01:31, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Porn stars

I just removed the birthnames which have no source (and may be incorrect). If you see that I removed something else about porn stars please revert me. --Haham hanuka 14:27, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I saw you taking out infoboxes. Was inspecting your usual round of vandalism on Yigal Amir and Israeli right related articles. I have little knowledge of porn actresses myself. gidonb 14:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

you are the one who vandalized Israeli right related articles by adding them your Points of View. --Haham hanuka 08:03, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I would say you have an extreme minority opinion there. Many other participants make the the same reversion as I do, according to the Wikipedia guidelines. I think you were blocked a long time for not keeping them. Hope you will do better now. gidonb 12:38, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Category:Israeli criminals

I left a request for you at Category talk:Israeli criminals, you may have missed it. Lapsed Pacifist 13:37, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

No I did not miss it. I happened to agree with User:Jayjg in his last answers and had nothing to add. gidonb 22:05, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

The request was made to you. While it's nice that you agree with Jayjg, s/he didn't address it either. Lapsed Pacifist 10:50, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

In his own way, I believe he did. You even seem to agree now that the discussion about these categories should really be held elsewehere. gidonb 01:30, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Barry Chamish

Do not remove links to his website. This is not a spam. If it is a spam so Barry Chamish entry on Wikipedia is a spam. If we have an article on him we should provide a link to his official website. --Haham hanuka 10:17, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

If you continue to remove those links you will be blocked. --Haham hanuka 10:21, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Please read my edit summaries more carefully and do not threaten those who positively contribute to our project. gidonb 10:23, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I've your edit summary and I still don't understand why those link should be removed. Can you explain why? --Haham hanuka 10:26, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Haham hanuka, thanks for asking this time. Please read the discussion on the talk page of the Rabin murder conspiracies carefully. If you have something to add, add it there. Do not add the links again until a different consensus is reached. You are quickly nearing the point at which you will be blocked under WP:3RR. gidonb 10:30, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I've read the "discussion" and I still don't understand why, can you explain it here?. I consider what you are doing as a vandalism. --Haham hanuka 10:33, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I have decided to hold the more substantial discussions on the relevant pages, so that other participators may join in or can refer to it in the future. According to our policies and the consensus reached, we do not link to this site. It is all on the talk page. You are of course entitled to think what you like. I wish to point at the fact, however, that you are frequently barred from editing Wikipedia. Surely there is some reason behind this. gidonb 10:39, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

There is no consensus about it, thats you own PoV. You should be blocked under WP:3RR. --Haham hanuka 10:52, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome to vote against me, when I run for admin. I have reached to the point where a few POV pushers consume so much of my time on Wikipedia that it has become difficult to be otherwise productive. What happens with your contributions? Why don't you concentrate on the porn actresses, where you seem to actually write something? gidonb 11:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Please be careful in your editing of this article. Do not break WP:3RR or you will be blocked; do not label content disputes as vandalism [2]; do not misrepresent "consensus" on the talk page. William M. Connolley 17:03, 28 January 2006 (UTC).

Haham hanuka's vandalism in this link was his indiscreet revert of my edits - in this case my removal of multiple and subsequent wiki's to the same article - rather than his adding of the disputed link that was actually according to our consensus, not against it. In this case, only one of us two seems to misrepresent the consensus. I invite anyone to follow the link you provided. I am sorry about your misrepresentation of my edit and would appreciate if you find time to correct it. gidonb 01:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

To make it worse, you did the same on talk:Barry Chamish. All obvious mistakes, but very damaging to my excellent reputation on Wikipedia. Please be more careful when you intervene into issues, being a moderator and taking an authorative position in your edits. gidonb 03:28, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

This issue still goes by unanswered. gidonb 15:18, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

3RR on Yitzhak Rabin assassination conspiracy theories

I have blocked you for 8h [3] for WP:3RR on Yitzhak Rabin assassination conspiracy theories. Please don't use "vandalism" to describe a content dispute. William M. Connolley 18:52, 28 January 2006 (UTC).

I am sorry that you took such a narrow view of my edits and blocked me after you suggested yourself that the consensus of removing the link refers to that article. I feel that this way I do not get the necessary assistance in my efforts against POV pushing, which consume too much of my energy and time already. I have come to a crossroad from where I need to decide whether I want to become an admin and to continue to address hoaxes, vandalism and the like, or quit Wikipedia. Please see also my answer above. gidonb 01:24, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

You are obliged to remain within 3RR in content disputes: the only exceptions are pure vandalism, which this wasn't. If you don't understand this, you have no hope of becoming an admin. You also need to understand that you can't use admin tools in disputes you have an interst in. William M. Connolley 10:26, 29 January 2006 (UTC).

I know all that and would keep our policies, unlike you, to the letter (see above and on talk:Barry Chamish). I am fully aware that after your smudging of my behavior on two pages the chances of an increased contribution on my part to this project have decreased. gidonb 13:18, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Two parallel discussions

On my page, you asserted that you breaking the 3RR was a "mistake". In what sense was it a mistake? William M. Connolley 14:49, 29 January 2006 (UTC).

That is not why I said on your talk page. You just deleted the text.[4] gidonb 14:51, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

The whole affair is at the end of the section above and at the Talk:Barry Chamish page, but you already several times got back to something else. gidonb 14:58, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

• After I added an extra header is is at the end of the Barry Chamish section and equally unanswered at Talk:Barry_Chamish#Request_for_discussion. gidonb 15:48, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I misread your edit [5]. I thought you were saying your 3RR was a mistake. OK, it wasn't a mistake, it was deliberate on your part. Apologies: no: your assertions that I have broken policy are absurd; please stop wasting my time with this. Your transfer this affair to another admin shows some mistunderstanding: I don't own this affair or any other (User:William M. Connolley/3RR). William M. Connolley 15:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC).

I see that you are getting back to the same affair once again, which is perhaps more convenient to you. I have somewhat given up hope but, perhaps after you read the section above and the discussion on Talk:Barry Chamish more carefully, you will suprise me. I will wait a little longer. gidonb 15:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

See this deleted text for more context. gidonb 15:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Elias Khoury

Hi Gidon, I'm not sure if the moves of Elias Khoury and Elias Khouri and creation of a disambiguation page was necessarily the best way to approach this. The writer is far better known and more notable (after all, the article about him could be considerably expanded; it's hard to imagine that there is a huge amount more encyclopaedic material that could be added to the article about the lawyer), and a google search for "Elias Khoury" [6] turns up 366000 thousand results, the vast majority about him. A google search for Elias Khouri turns up 79000 results mostly about the lawyer. I'd be inclined to suggest reversing the move. What is your view? Palmiro | Talk 12:38, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I will check it out. I just found a source that states he is "originally" from Nazareth [7]. This actually makes sense. I will remove him from born in Jerusalem. gidonb 13:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Palmiro, sorry I forgot about your inquiry. I see that you are actively improving the article. I agree that putting the famous Elias Khoury in the root is a good idea. The referal to the Elias Khoury (lawyer) is already there. Regards, gidonb 20:45, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Wrote you a longer reply and Wikipedia lost it, and now it is late and I have to go. Probably what works best (and would be easiest) is redirecting Elias Khoury to Elias Khoury (writer) instead of to the disambiguation and leaving the other pages as they are, so if that's OK with you I'll probably go ahead and do it some time soon. I have looked through the relevant policy and guideline pages and can't find anything too conclusive. Looking afterwards at some of the pages that my google search turned up, I suspect that the lawyer could actually be expanded a bit after all - he seems to have been involved fairly prominently in some important cases related to the dreaded Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Palmiro | Talk 21:03, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Palmiro, I see that you handled it all. Looks good. Thank you for supporting the article on the less renowned Elias Koury. Regards, gidonb 06:34, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

No problem. In any case it is such a common name (possibly the second most-common name-surname combination among Christian Arabs after George Khoury!) that there are probably quite a few notable Elias Khourys out there currently flying under our radar, so the disambig. page you set up may well come in useful in the future. Elias Khoury is one of my favourite contemporary novelists, and one of the most interesting intellectuals in the Arab world at the moment, so I may well be working more on that article in the future. Palmiro | Talk 10:49, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Palmiro, I gathered so much. I know everything about favorite authors. I am such a big fan of my favorite author, that he also knows me by now (writing Wikipedia articles, exchanging short emails and all that). With Arabic literature I have never gotten further than Mahfouz (well, I started a Gibran book, but got stuck). To my defense I can say that I enjoyed Mahfouz a lot, read two of his books, much before he won the Nobel Prize and became fashionable. Regards, gidonb 08:51, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Plaut???

Why does that Kempler Video guy think you're someone named Plaut? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, yeah, rub it in! :-D gidonb 05:23, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Off topic quip

I totally agree. The US is heaven on earth for anyone who is not part of a majority, including women who are the majority (51.1% in 2004). gidonb 18:35, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Women are apparently a minority in much the same way that blacks in south africa are. I know it requires some mental gymnastics, but so do alot of leftist concepts ;) Sam Spade 11:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd know, because that is where I came from. It is always a pleasure to exchange thoughts with you. Regards, gidonb 01:29, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Your S African? Sam Spade 00:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

No, I meant that I grew up in a left-wing milieu. I am neither left or right-leaning today. gidonb 00:13, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I usually call myself radical centrist, but most people call me right... I can accept that ;) I tried to outline my beliefs in some detail @ User:Sam Spade/Theoretical Biases. Do let me know if you have a label for me, I'm always eager to hear another informed opinion, esp. regarding myself 8D Sam Spade 01:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I accept that this can be a profile of a centrist. I noticed before that our opinions and observations are very similar, although not identical. Overall I am a little less right-leaning than you and thus sometimes take offense if people call me that way. gidonb 01:24, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I was convinced that I was a leftist for years, but I finaly decided that if people so consistantly called me right, I must be... in every sense of the word ;) Sam Spade 23:58, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Yigal Amir

pls don't break the 3RR role. Official website should placed on top (in any article), quote is povish and not relvant. --Haham hanuka 14:18, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

And very important think, pls don't add your points of view on wikipedia articles. I know you hate Yigal Amir and that's fine, but don't try to show it on his wikipedia article. look at September 11, 2001 attacks (attacks not "terror") or Tali Hatuel ("was shot at close range and killed" - the word "murdered" is not there) and learn who to write article clean of POV. --Haham hanuka 14:27, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Lapsed Pacifist 16:37, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Haham, it is really a pitty that you choose not to answer my question, but instead again reverted my edits to the article. gidonb 17:53, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I have taken this to the Yigal Amir talk page, so we can finish this business once and for all. By the way, funny you would talk to me about 3RR. You are about as frequently blocked here as allowed to particpate. At the Hebrew Wikipedia you are permanently blocked. gidonb 16:18, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

CfD: Category:Wikipedian Chazanim

Hi Gidon: Can you believe this: Category:Wikipedian Chazanim ? I have thus nominated it for deletion, see Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 February 5#Category:Wikipedian Chazanim. Thanks. IZAK 21:02, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Izak, I did my civil duty ;-) Regards, gidonb 23:46, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Hebrew

בכל מקרה אתה די טועה באבחנה שלך, נתחיל בזה שאני דווקא משתייך לצד השמאלי של המפה הפוליטית (עלה ירוק) ככה שאני לא תומך ביגאל עמיר אבל אני כן חושב שהערך שלו פה צריך להיות אובייקטיבי. אתה כנראה עדיין לא הבנת איך כותבים ערכים מנקודת מבט ניטרלית וזה חבל. אגב כל ההצבעות בדף השיחה אינם נספרות ונחשבות כי המצביעים נחשבים לבובות קש. --Haham hanuka 19:23, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

You could have deducted that I use Hebrew by my edits. Yet why should it be relevant what languages I speak when I try to foster the neutral character of Wikipedia? I could put a series of babel signs on my user page, but personally it would make me feel uncomfortable. I respect that others feel fine with the language signs and have voted to keep them in Wikipedia. gidonb 19:44, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Duplicates of: Violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Hi Gidon: The following four articles (lists actually) have duplicate articles that need to be merged into them. See the "merged into" notices on:

1. Violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict 2000 (has three duplicates);
2. Violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict 2001 (has one duplicate);
3. Violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict 2002 (has two duplicates);
4. Violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict 2003 (has two duplicates).

Thanks for looking into this. IZAK 13:11, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Izak, this is not so much my field, but I will see if I can do something. I do support such merges. But how about Yuber, he seems to be an expert in this field of Israeli casualties. I think you did not turn to him. Best regards, gidonb 16:55, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, IZAK. I did not know there were issues with Yuber. I see it now for the first time. I only knew that his article carried a POV tag. The duplicates may be the produce of too much concentration on violence. I will give it a shot another time. Tonight I worked on Israel the article. There is still a lot to do. I heard close to nothing on the edits. Can you take a look? gidonb 20:31, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Armenian Genocide

Actually I did know that any POV fork like that would be deleted but was hoping said contributor would put effort into that and leave the Armenian Geneocide page alone.  :) I'm getting really weary of the constant barrage of POV claims. Yes, the article is biased, yes it always will be. That is the nature of the beast. *ugh* pschemp | talk 14:55, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I understand what you mean. Still I believe that the Armenian genocide needs to be less controversial for Turks than it is. I think there are three important principles here:

1. Never water down genocides and other human rights issues.
2. Understand that the Turks who argue with you are relatively speaking of the more nationalistic kind, through self-selection.
3. Investigate the Turkish recognition of the genocide. This is well done for the late recognition, however, the early recognition is totally overlooked. It is uncomfortable for the nationalistic Turks but perhaps sometimes also for Armenians that right after the genocide Turks recognized what was done and were very unhappy about it. At that point you can start building a better consensus. gidonb 15:17, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

That's good information to know, I assume you have sources you'l be sharing or know where to find them? I can't go that route at the moment because I don't have the kind of serious reference background I would need, but I'd be interested to see that information. pschemp | talk 15:54, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Sure thing. I will refresh my reading as well, if I am going to deal with the Armenian genocide more seriously. Regards, gidonb 15:58, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Gird your lions! Er, loins.pschemp | talk 16:12, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your support over the pathetic arbitration request. Really these kind of people are pathetic. John Smith's 19:02, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

John, the support was for your comment on the talk page, just after mine. I did not see the RfA. The link brought me to vandalism on a RfA page. Can you give me the link to the header of the RfA? Thanks! gidonb 19:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

New Template:Juddom

Hi Gidon: Gutt Voch! Please see the newly-proposed Template:Juddom which strikes me as odd and redundent for now. Please add your views at Template talk:Juddom. Thanks. IZAK 14:06, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I have reacted at the talk page. gidonb 08:35, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Chabad link in Minyan Article

Hello, Gidonb, I would appreciate your comments/opinions in the debate I am having with Eliezer here: Talk:Minyan#External_Links. Thank you. -- Avi 17:16, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Avi, I reacted on the talk page. Cheers, gidonb 17:48, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello Gidonb, thank you for you support in my RfA. I was promoted with a final count of 48/1/0! If you see me making any mistakes, let me know ASAP. -- WB 02:18, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your note, Watter Bottle. Some mistakes are inherent to any action. I am happy you made it and made it so well. Good luck and enjoy!!! gidonb 03:47, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Rafael Eitan

Hello. I see you deleted my modification.

I had the same feeling than you ie : it was not the right place. But this information is I think relevant and important in the context of Sabrah and Shatila.

Eitan was there the day before and both sharon and he met Hobeikka. It is "always" written Sharon but they were both.

In Mitla incident, this is also Eitan who was the leading commander on the field but these incidents are pushed under the responsability of Sharon.

How may we introduce these facts at best ?

User:ChrisC 07:58, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

You may add it in an article that goes into such detail. In fact, when you did, I did not delete the point. I deleted it where the level of this detail seemed unrelated with the rest of the text. I wrote all this in the edit summary. gidonb 14:59, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Good Work

I, Ramallite, hereby award you this Barnstar for your efforts at revamping Jerusalem. (KC) 20:50, 17 February 2006

Now to add Palestinian culture/history/etc in the near future (I hope). My turn to see what I can dig up from that great city on the other side of the wall. Well done, very nice work. Ramallite ^(talk) 20:50, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Shukran ya Ramallite. I really appreciate it. There is room for much more information in the article. gidonb 21:48, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Halacha

Hello Gidon:Gut Voch. Please see and add your views to a very serious discussion at Template talk:Infobox Halacha#This infobox must carry a warning. Thank you. IZAK 05:13, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Hello Izak, with this warning, or we not stating the obvious? Are yeshiva bachurs going to check Wikipedia instead of the Rabbinic literature? I think we can do without, as those who are extremely concerned with these issues will not make such a mistake anyway. If you insist, please put the warning at the bottom. gidonb 08:40, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

While we former yeshiva bachurim know better than to use Wikipedia as a source for psak, I am afraid that there are many people without said background that may be tempted. It is more private than asking a shaila, it is easier than schlepping out to the rav, etc. This may be a situation requireing a syag. Also, it is different now, that it does not exits, than after it does. Shev V'al Ta'aseh is always easier than Kum V'a'asay. :-) -- Avi 15:28, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Avi, I trust that people who use Wikipedia, know what it is. It says when you enter "Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit." There are other disclaimers. It is true that it is very available, but people also know editors can be from all dominations (Jewish and non-Jewish). I assume that those who look for piska'ot halakha info on the web turn to Jewish sites related to them. I do some writing for a certain chassidic movement myself (obviously not on Halakha) and the publication always refers to their websites and the telephone number of the rabbi is there to dial all day long. People are warned about the other synagogue ("where I will never set a foot"), including rachmana litzlan websites faking any (!) Judaism which are far off from any info we provide. Those who care even a little hear/read these warnings time again. On the other hand, I appreciate your and Izak worries, hence I say if you must do it not in font 48 on the top of the template. gidonb 15:46, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Rotary International

Hello, I would be happy that you have an eye on the contribution I made about Rotary. I forgot to mention that Bush family was involved in financing German banks and Oswiecim mines befor WWII and that a famous Rotarian, Charles Lindbergh was rather friendly to NSDAP.

Would you have the time to review the Wiki, why not in all the langages for Rotary ? I tried to let evolve about all langage versions, and it began when I read in the de.wikipedia that Rotary made discussions from 1933 to 1937 with NSDAP.

Thank you Pierre Larcin, pierre.larcin@ifrance.com 20JAN2006, 20H00 Paris time

17 January 2006 (UTC)

Many foreign parties had some connections with the NSDAP when they just came to power, and eventually broke off these ties. This does sound awful in retrospect, but one has to consider the fact that it takes some time to adjust foreign policies in a relative peaceful period and that it was, at that time, not yet the global communications "see all know all" era. The relations may have been continued diplomatic and economic relations with Germany in general and its establishment. The important fact is that they were broken off well before the war, after the true nature of this German government became clear. I frankly do not know what you want from me. gidonb 20:02, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Well I would like you to represent yourself a big organisation like Rotary, with let say some million of members, with montly report to the siege in Michigan, with local governors (look on the Rotary history, some legends there try to explain how much there were active and controlling what was going in Germany between 1930 and 1937). I would like you to represent about 30.000 Rotarians in Germany, and all the Rotary structure NEGOCIATING DURING FOUR YEARS WITH THE NAZI NSDAP STRUCTURE TO DECIDE THE FUTURE OF THE ROTARY CLUB, and, DURING FOUR YEARS, no one of these pretty Rotarians seeing that Gestapo was arresting opponents, people disappearing, protests against first Dachau concentration camp in Bavaria. Nuremberg laws published, and DURING FOUR YEARS, THEY DID NOTHING, as they say they were prosecuted, but lived all the war along and even met during the war (see witnesses I speak above). Were you ever prosecuted during FOUR years, GidonB, and you were seeing nothing ? Negociating with your enemy ?

Strange explanation of the Rotary for his 1933-1937 German FOUR YEARS of negociation with NSDAP, PLUS THE YEARS BEFORE 1933 WERE NSDAP WAS RULING BAVARIA, GidonB. Do not forget that Dachau, North of Munich, opens in 1933...and even a bit before. If you look to both three Rotarians, Pinochet, Prescott Bush and Lindbergh, you do not remark something ? Look to the central place of Rotary, Illinois, and the central place for Ford Company, you do not find strange that Rotarians never approached Henry Ford, GidonB ? Have a look at the wiki for Henry Ford, my dear. Have a look on GeneralMotors and Opel roles during WWII and nazi trucks, Ford Trucks also. So, you do not remark anything ?

Well, I will give you a clue : if you accept to place the Shoah view beside you, and look to the nazi concentration camp, you will remark something. Is the nazi camp not the perfect factory, were the worker becomes also some MATERIAL for the whole process ? A Rotarian world of perfection, my dear, so you can understand the OTHER reason why they negociated...

By the way, GidonB, if you know some Rotary club at your place, would you have a look into and see if there is some...I would say...colored people in the club (not the waiters of course :-) any Black member among the others ? Any Chinese or Vietnamese ? Would you make some correspondence between the repartition of members and the repartition of the population ? Can you look to the Rotary foundation and maybe understand WHY Hiram E. Shorey 'will leave quickly the Rotary, it seems for professional reasons ?'

Did you ever find these genealogies where Rotarians make Paul Harris, the founder, have a genealogy coming back to the pilgrims of the Mayflower ?

Thank you for your attention, GidonB and have that opinion from me : Communautarism is the enemy of the Republic.

pierre.larcin@ifrance.com PierreLarcin2 22:43, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Pierre, I am afraid that you are at the wrong place to start such a discussion. I would like to refer you to this article and the linked articles for more reading about Wikipedia. Do not hesitate to turn to me again if you need help with anything and I will see what I can do. Regards, gidonb 20:24, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for your support of my request for adminship. I'm delighted that the RfA ultimately succeeded with a final conseznsus of 52/1/0, so I am now an administrator. If you ever have any comments regarding my editing, or I can help you at any point in the future, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Again, thank you!

_└ ^UkPaolo/_talk^┐ 10:38, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

UkPaolo, that is wonderful!!! Good luck and thank you very much for your beautiful message. gidonb 12:07, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Overarching category

in the Ofra article, what does that mean?--Shuki 13:35, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Could also be underlying, it all depends on your geometric point of view :-D You did great work on this article. gidonb 13:54, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Still no comprendo, but I guess I agree about cleaning up, which I'm also a freak about. --Shuki 17:30, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

In this case cleaning up the category root of Israel. I am working on it. Glad to find a partner. Cheers, gidonb 18:00, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Mass Revert

I apologize for mass reverting, but you missed the part where it called Yigal Amir a murderer. He assassinated someone. Anyone who kills a political figure, especially a polarizing political figure commits an act that cannot be disconnected for the ideological or political motivation. I am sorry that I connected your edits to a mistake possibly made by others when referring to Yigal Amin.

Guy Montag 04:20, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Guy. No problem. An assassination can be in extreme cases in the framework of the law, murder not. Therefor I believe murder is better. That said, we have argued about this point in the past and have agreed to use murder only next to conviction, convicted, sentenced etcetera and assassination in all other cases. As I see it, assassination is not incorrect, it is just less specific. Regards, gidonb 04:36, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Israel

You have made so many edits on it one after the other, please use the Preview --Adam1213 Talk + 11:05, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I used it, however I am moving around lots of stuff, between articles, in the article. It is difficult for me without saving every now and then. It will also be difficult to follow such deep changes without me saving at set moments. Plus, I do make mistakes. I hope the results are good. In the end, it should look like a country article. We are not there yet. Next I need to write several chapters. gidonb 11:10, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

the three weeks and The Nine Days

Hi, I don't know what you were attempting to do in the articles The Nine Days and the three weeks, but I don't think it had the intended result (your edits did not effect the page at all). I reverted both of them, so you may want to go back and make the intended change. Jon513 14:50, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jon513, my intention was that "The Nine Days" would be filed under "N(in)" and "the three weeks" would be filed under "T(hr)" (almost no difference) in the categories. I will make the change once more only if you think that this is a good idea. I assumed you were very sure that both should be filed under "T(he)", so I intended not to say anything. In a third case, "THE Third Temple", I suggested changing the file name altogether on the talk page (4-5 bullet points). I would appreciate if you can (re)consider all three and tell me what you think, the first two anywhere and The Third Temple on the relevant talk page. Regards, gidonb 15:00, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

RfAs (1)

Thank you for supporting me in my successful RFA. I appreciate your kind words and confidence. Admin tools will be handy for dealing with vandalism more swiftly, and protecting the integrity of Wikipedia. --Aude (talk | contribs) 00:18, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

You are most welcome! Thank you for thanking me. I am glad you made it. We can use some extra hands in protection from vandalism. Good luck and all the best! gidonb 00:21, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

With apologies for the impersonal AWB-ness of the message... Thanks for your support on my recent request for adminship. It passed at 91/1/0, and I hope I can continue to deserve the community's trust. Let me know if there's anything I can do to help you, and if I make a mistake be sure to tell me. My talk page is always open. (ESkog)^(Talk) 02:45, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Eskog, I am glad you made it! I may pick you up on that offer sometime, as I keep an eye on some of the more contested articles on Wikipedia. Usually I do get helped by the admins. Regards, gidonb 02:49, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I just wanted to say thank you for voting for my RFA, of course if you ever need a hand, let me know :) - cohesion★talk 00:01, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I am glad you made it! Thanks for thanking me! ;-) gidonb 00:05, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Positions on Jerusalem

Ik ben zo vrij geweest om dit artikel enigszins te bewerken.
I took the liberty to do some copyediting on this article. Meursault2004 22:38, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you Revo. I copied this text "as is" from the Jerusalem article, which suffered under the burden of too many opinions and too little descriptions of the city. As my interest is with the latter, I expended the Jerusalem article with new chapters on the environment, culture and sports, but did not bother further with the opinions. Thank you for improving its organization! Regards, gidonb 23:00, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

My RFA

Thank you for supporting my successful request for adminship. I'll try to put the admin tools to good and responsible use. If I do anything wrong you know where to find me. Raven4x4x 07:42, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome. I am glad you made it! Regards, gidonb 17:57, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Category:Midian et. al

Hello, Gidonb. I would like your opinion and feedback regarding a discussion I am having with Briangotts here about various categories including Category:Midian and Category:Edom. This issue is whether the categories themselves should be subcategories of Category:Torah people and Category:Torah places, or whether just the articles which actually are about Category:Torah people, such as the parent article Edom and Esau, should be tagged. Further explanation and a place to both voice your opinion and vote may be found on the talk page of Category:Midian. Thank you for your time and input. -- Avi 19:38, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

RfAs (2)

Thank you for voting on my RfA, it passed with a final tally of 68/0/0 so I'm now an administrator. If there's anything I can do to help, you feel I've done something wrong, or there's just something you want to tell, don't hesitate to use my talk page. Thanks. - Bobet 10:29, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Most welcome, glad you made it! gidonb 12:33, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for your support in my request for adminship (did you know that "adminiship" is not an English word? Unbelievable!). It ended with a tally of (51/0/0). As an administrator, I hope to better help this project and its participants: if you have any question or request, please let me know. - Liberatore(T) 12:16, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Most welcome, glad you made it! gidonb 12:33, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, sure you can. Thanks again! - Liberatore(T) 12:52, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Settlements in Israel

I am frustrated with your aggressive unilateral closing of this issue, especially an American who appreciates procedures (or are you really an Israeli :-) Anyway, I expect more, especially from a veteran wikipedian. In contrast to the discussion about the article itself (and its previous versions/namings), there was very little discussion about the actual move. --Shuki 17:59, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

שוקי תעשה לי טובה. אני אתך. ניסיתי להסביר, הבאתי המון הוכחות ואנשים לא מוכנים לשמוע. כל הזמן חוזרים לאותה נקודה. זה לא מדעי, זה לא רציני אבל זה מה שרוצים. תכבד את ההחלטה בבשקה. רוצה לפתוח את הנושא מחדש, בבקשה, אני אתמוך בך, אבל בערך חדש. הדיון פה הסתיים בהחלטה רבתית הפוכה מדעתי וזה לא יראה רציני אם נפתח אותו חודשים אחרי שהתסיים. אני כתבתי את כל הטקסט וכבר שילבתי אותו על דעת הקהילה במאמר השני. gidonb 18:07, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Shabbat Foreign Language Links

Just wondering, why did you remove the de and ja links? Are they sabbath (as opposed to Shabbat)? Thanks, -Reuvenk_[T][C] 19:19, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

To the best of my understanding, they are. I will double-check. It was a quite difficult cut everywhere. I am going to do some more research. Thank you for bringing this up, Reuven! gidonb 20:09, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I was just wondering, but the Japanese article seemed to be Shabbat (see the chart at the bottom of the article). That said, I speak absolutely no Japanese. -Reuvenk_[T][C] 20:31, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

RfAs (3)

Thank you! Hi Gidonb/Archive 2006, thank you for your support in my Rfa! It passed with a final tally of 86/0/0. If you need help or just want to talk let me know! Again, thank you! – Dakota ~ ° 21:15, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your support in my request for adminship. I'm delighted that the RfA succeeded with a final consensus of 52/17/7, and receiving comments including having 'excellent potential to become a great moderator', and I am now an administrator. It did however only just pass, and I shall do my very best to rectify any of my errors, including the general belief that I should do more article work. If you have any concerns, or if you ever feel that I may be able to help you, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Again, thank you!

Ian13/talk 19:27, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! Thank you for your support in my recent RFA. It passed 53/1/2 and I am now an administrator. I appreciate that some of you made exceptions to your usual requirements re length of service and so on because we've interracted positively in the past, or because of my credentials, so I will endeavour to use my new mop cautiously. I'm always open to feedback and gently constructive criticism. If you're not an admin and need some assistance do of course please let me know. Thanks again --kingboyk 00:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

P.S. If you are interested in The Beatles, User:Lar has asked me to tag on a little note advertising the creation of a new Beatles WikiProject that we are currently setting up. Please sign up and help.

Hi Kingboyk. Thanks for thanking me. I am glad you made it and wish you good luck! I take interest in many kinds of music, including but not especially The Beatles. I am sure that I will enjoy the new pages and improvements to existing pages that will roll out of your project. Cheers! gidonb 12:50, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your vote and support in my RfA. Unfortunately, it closed without consensus, (22/11/8). I hope that you'll keep me in mind in any future RfA. --Christopherlin 16:43, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! Hi Gidonb/Archive 2006, thank you for your support in my RfA: it passed with a final tally of 55/1/2. If you want a hand with anything, please gimme a shout. Again, thanks! – JDoorjam Talk 20:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Ehud Olmert

(in Hebrew) צריך להבהיר לקורא הלא ישראלי שהשירות בצהא הישראלי הוא שירות חובה --Haham hanuka 12:36, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

אגב זה לא אתי מה שאתה עושה, מצביע לטובת אנשים אל מנת שהם יצביעו לך, זה כזה שקוף, אל תחשוב שלא שמים לב לזה. --Haham hanuka 12:38, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I do not see why the various and rather complicated regulations by which people are drafted to this Israeli army are relevant for the article on Ehud Olmert. Also, other than what you suggest, I am not and have never been a candidate for moderatorship. Not here and not on any other Wikipedia. I have often been asked to become an admin and have as of yet always refused the honor. I am active in assisting well qualified candidates to pass the hurdle. My motives are assisting these individuals and broadening the admin base of Wikipedia. I recently got the feeling that very few are totally stressed out or just abusing their powers. More admins will ease this situation and increase the quality of our communal work. This is very different than the weird suggestion you made. gidonb 12:56, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

מבחינה ישראלית זה חשוב, וגם זה שהם ירדו מהארץ. זה מלמד הרבה על האיש. אני מאמין שהרבה אנשים ירתעו ממנו אם ידעו את העובדות האלה.

ובלי קשר לזה, אולי הגיע נזמן להשלים אחד עם השני? --Haham hanuka 13:09, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I have suggested in the past that we put differences behind us. Admittedly abusing Wikipedia to push a political agenda is very related, however. I judge people by their actions. gidonb 13:45, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

RfAs (4)

Hi Gidonb. My goodness, you get a lot of these! I thought long and hard about bucking the trend, but decided in the end to make this vulture-themed message. Admins are sort of like vultures, cleaning things up and whatnot... well, as long as you don't think too much about it. Anyway, I wanted to thank you for taking the time to consider my RfA, which passed this morning. If there's ever anything I can help you with, just ask; you know where to find me. Emphatic apologies for the spam. ×Meegs 07:32, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Meegs. Thank you for the personal message. I am glad you made it and wish you good luck! Best regards, gidonb 12:46, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

File:Re-exposure of elephant - lahugala park1.jpg

I think I'm the bird on its head.

Thanks for your support in my RfA. It passed, with a final tally of 62/0/1. I'm touched by all the kind comments it attracted, and hope I'll be of some use with the new tools. You know where I am if you need to shout at me. Flowerparty? 15:54, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

WikiThanks

Thanks for supporting my RFA. I really appreciated the show of support and all the kind words from so many great Wikipedians. I hope I live up to them! -- Vary | Talk 17:34, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Marcus Klingberg

I moved Avraham Klingberg to Marcus Klingberg and deleted the redirect. Avraham Marcus Klingberg still redirects to Marcus Klingberg. There are some double redirects you may want to address to the original article. Let me know if you need anything else. xaosflux ^Talk/_CVU 03:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Xaosflux, thank you very much for your help! I will now fix the redirects. gidonb 13:14, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, need help

Hi, you welcomed me to Wikipedia when I joined so I thought I'd write to you. I am the subject of a personal attack by a user who is accusing me of "bullying" and quoting me as making comments to him that I did not make, not following Wiki protocols, etc. Quite honestly, I have been trying to work in good faith. I am really shocked and don't know what to do. elizmr 01:18, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Yigal Amir

אתה לא חושב שכמות הקישורים שם קצת מוגזמת? וויקיפדיה היא לא מאגר לינקים. --Haham hanuka 14:03, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I think the article can use more quality texts and links. I am glad you agree that Wikipedia is not a repesitory of links. WP:EL and linked articles provide more information. gidonb 16:57, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Edit war over Carlebach "allegations"

Hi Gidon:I am not making much headway with User:Ckessler at Talk:Shlomo Carlebach#Allegations, yet again. I have placed this message on her page, and she is going for mediation, but I have yet to see where.

Hi Ckessler: You are on the borderline of breaking the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule in the Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach article, see [8] I do not wish to revert you a third time today. Twice is enough for me, I have no choice but to wait another 24 hours to do so. You are treating hearsay and gossip as if they were the legal equivalants of allegations in a duly constituted court of law. A number of admins who know something about this subject will be contacted, to advise how we should proceed. Your refusal to discuss to resolve this matter on the article's talk page is disappointing.

Your input into this matter would be highly appreciated. Thanks. IZAK 09:17, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Also add your comments at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-03-23 Shlomo Carlebach. Thank you. IZAK 10:35, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

IP

Sir, per your edits, I have reflected the page as "Palestinian Arab within Israel" (or vice versa, I forget which) per the citations. Lokiloki 05:34, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I already responded on Talk:Israeli Arab by your earlier request. Regards, gidonb 05:43, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Edits

בוא לא נגרר למלחמות עריכה שוב. אתרים "רשמיים" צריכים להופיע קודם, וזאת עפ"י ההגיון הבריא והמדיניות של וויקיפדיה. אנא אל תכניס את דעותיך האישיות לערכים, הרי אתה כבר יודע שאני לא ימני, ואני מתקן גם שמוטים ימינה. --Haham hanuka 10:38, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Please respect the decisions that have been made and policies that were made official and stop trying to influence articles according to your political convictions, whatever they are. You mentioned earlier on this page in Hebrew that the public should be warned about Olmert, that does not comply with your latest statement. Also, warning someone about 3RR if you delete time after time the creative work of your colleagues, marked as minor edits, and are very often blocked from using Wikipedia for breaking 3RR and indefinitely banned in your mother tongue, does not look very serious. You regularly disrespect votes and discussions and invent policies. Most of this has been mentioned to you by before, including by admins. Please stop deleting large sections of articles without edit summaries. gidonb 11:10, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Accidently removed?

Regarding this, do you have an idea how I did this? It was definitely accidental, and I'm confused. Thx! --Kickstart70·Talk 16:53, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

It was probably an edit conflict.

Why nothing has been done about the matter is possible because no diff-links were supplied. Have a look at the other 3RR reports to see how they have done it. HH has just come back from a 48 hour ban due to 3RR and trying to circumventing the ban. As far as the article is concerned I cannot read the referenced newsarticle it being in Hebrew. I'd like to hear a comment from someone speaking the language first before proceeding. FWIW the edits sound of a inflamatory nature. Agathoclea 19:07, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Kickstart70, this has happened to me in the past. Perhaps a bug or a sequence of button using that is hard to reconstruct. It is very clear to me that there was no bad intention whatsoever.

Agathoclea, I agree with your cautious observation. The article is a review of a reality tv show with some gossip in a local newspaper (a weekly) in Tel Aviv. The author must have wanted to say something juicy to make his article more interesting. This has nothing to do with wide criticism. 18.5 years is a mature woman, not a girl. Why they would want each other is their business. He tries to tabloidize many articles. In the recent past he tried to push some statement about the little child of actress Orna Banai because some people gossip that she may be Lesbian. HH seems to get very exited about anything with some sexual connotation and may not be mature enough for our project. If he would just contribute to the porn actresses, that would still not be a problem, but even there I just saw that he does not allow the team to decide that some actresses or information are not notable enough.[9] I try to focus on Politics, Israel, Crime, Geography and the Arts and find it hard to keep up with all the damage he does. I have tried to communicate with him many times, but now reached the conclusion that it is about time to permanently ban Haham hanuka, just as the Hebrew Wikipedia did. He is too much trouble and rarely does any good. gidonb 01:03, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Curiosity, bilateral

Hi there, I answered a question of yours on Talk:The_Holocaust#Request_for_Arabic_speakers - just pointing it out in case you didn't notice it, since the question had been there for a while. Palmiro | Talk 17:25, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Also, only just noticed your last reply under Elias Khoury above. If you don't mind my curiosity, which you have now piqued ;), who is your favourite author? Palmiro | Talk 17:47, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

OK, from a look at your editing patterns (isn't that creepy?) I am deducing that it's either Janwillem van de Wetering or Barry Chamish ;) Palmiro | Talk 18:19, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

p.s. I saw something vague about you and adminship on some talk page I was visiting while trying to work out who your favourite author was. (It is really amazing the sort of things you can end up doing to procrastinate when you know should be doing something else for a looming deadline.) If you are interested, I would be happy to nominate you. Palmiro | Talk 19:15, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Palmiro, Janwillem van de Wetering is indeed my favorite author if we do not count Barry Chamish :-D I am very honored by your offer to nominate me as an administrator, so honored that I did not know what to respond right away. I will think it over and let you know. Thank you and best regards, gidonb 21:50, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Natalie Portman

As I do not read Hebrew script very well, can you tell me how to spell Natalie Hershlag, her real name, in Hebrew. Thanks :-) Meursault2004 17:46, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Meursault2004! I would put down נטלי הרשלג, which Israelis would pronounce as Harsheleg (snow mountain), unless they know better. הרשלאג would by the way to avoid this problem, but it is not the common transcription. Regards, gidonb 21:46, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Hang on the Hebrew Wikipedia says הר-שלג. I will check this out some more. This should be an interview with her in Hebrew: http://celebs.walla.co.il/?w=/3608/884922. gidonb 04:00, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Hey Gidonb thank you! I have put this additional information in the Indonesian Wikipedia! Meursault2004 12:40, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome, Meursault2004. I looked it up in the Indonesian Wikipedia, the web and the clip I could not watch yesterday. I would definately stick with נטלי הרשלג as I found no indication whatsoever that it was written נטלי הר-שלג, in spite of the article's name on the Hebrew Wikipedia. Let me explain. If one writes הרשלג an Israeli may pronounce Harsheleg unless he knows better. If it was הר-שלג Israelis would say Har-Sheleg in spite of the original name because it is a hebraized name. All indications I could find, including the interview (clearly Harshlag), are that the former and not the latter is the case. If I find opposite indications at any time, I promise to change also the Indonesian Wikipedia. gidonb 21:17, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your attention and help in correcting the spelling in the Indonesian article! Meursault2004 15:51, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

User:Haham hanuka

Haham hanuka seems to evade his block again, this time from IP 62.0.118.79. There is some page I can raise this with the system people. Do you know what it is? Thanks, gidonb 13:03, 6 April 2006 (UTC) Copied from Stifle's talk page

He certainly seems to be evading the block again. The best place to post this kind of report is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard, where more admins will see it. I think that this should be taken to WP:RFC - will you help me put it together? Stifle 13:25, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I have put it all at the bottom of WP:RCU. Is there another noticeboard I should add this to, like the 3RR noticeboard but for suspected block evasions? I sure will help with the RFC, but I must confess there is another one I started and haven't finished yet. Regards, gidonb 14:12, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

You could put it on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Stifle (talk) 14:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you Stifle. I just did it. I will add information to your RFC. gidonb 15:08, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

hoi!

(in Dutch)[For other readers: This message is in Dutch.] Hoi Gidon, ik ben sinds kort zeer actief op de Nederlandse Wikipedia en ga die enorm uitbreiden. Zie mijn userpage (zelfde username op NL) voor een overzichtje van artikelen die ik onlangs geschreven heb. Ik maak alles overzichtelijker, duidelijker. Daarbij wijzig ik wel enkele dingen - zo gebruik ik Tora in plaats van Thora. Liefst nog Torah, want dat is gewoon de correcte vorm, maar absoluut niet 'Thora'. Verder schrijf ik een shin als 'sh', niet 'sj'. Namelijk, 'sj' geeft een foute klank voor mensen die dit alleen lezen. Je krijgt dan de klank die een Hollander gebruikt als hij 'koosjer' zegt. Dat is fout. Het is namelijk een veel kortere klank dan die 'sj'. Bovendien gebruikt haast de hele wereld 'sh' en leest het gewoon makkelijker. Ik hoop dat ik van de sectie Jodendom op wiki-nl een nog veel uitgebreider informatiever onderdeel kan maken, een onderdeel dat de strijd met de sectie Christendom zonder twijfel aan kan. Je hoeft trouwens niet te komen kijken op wiki-nl, ik begrijp dat je dat liever niet meer doet. In ieder geval weet je nu dat iemand de sectie op zich heeft genomen. Vannacht heb ik er alweer 10 uur (!!) aan zitten schrijven... Wish me luck! --Daniel575 04:38, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Daniel, I wish you good luck. I do look around every now and then at the Dutch Wikipedia, but less as time passes. I liked much of what you do. I would not get into fights over the spelling. Unless a principal is involved, it just isn't worth it. Also do not worry about Christianity too much, it never applied to us. Content is the main thing that matters. Let me know if you need any help and keep up the good work! gidonb 09:15, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not so sure any more. All of those גוים intervening in very annoying ways (they are not Jews, they do not know anything about Judaism, have never contributed anything useful to the entire section on Judaism (with a few exceptions), and cannot even read Hebrew!) annoy me very much. I am more or less considering to either start my own website (something like jewfaq.org) or to follow you to the English Wikipedia completely. I'm already active here quite a lot anyway, though it could be more. Well, speak to you later! --Daniel575 23:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Given the amount of knowledgeable people on every topic, the work on the English language Wikipedia is intellectually more satisfying than working on the Dutch Wikipedia. At the same time I have never met a person who could not teach me something (as they say so beautifully in Hebrew Mikol melamdai hiskalti). You do not have to be Jewish to research Judaism let alone write about it in an open source encyclopedia. At the Dutch Wikipedia many participants really went out of their way to translate articles from the English Wikipedia, or to write about a synagogue, a community, a Jewish person or even on a Jewish custom they deemed important from reading what they consider to be the Old Testament among other efforts. True, it annoys that the concepts used to describe Judaism are sometimes taken directly from a Christian conceptual world. Yet even this does not go without merit, as it can teach you about the people who are most likely to read it in Dutch. I think we all bring our biases into the edit process. The product, the effort and the good intention should all count when judging contributions. I stepped out because of the abuse, the inequality among users and the bad atmosphere, next to the ease of editing here, but continue to do some interwiki work every now and then. I think that the challenges of both Wikipedias are very different. Translating entire articles from English to Dutch usually benefits that encyclopedia. gidonb 01:41, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Olmert is the Vice Prime Minister not the Deputy Prime Minister

Wow Gidonb! You really did your homework. I was pretty sure the media called him Deputy PM (I know. We can't trust the media). Then how come Olmert took over if he is the VP, wouldn't the President take reponsibility after Sharon's health problems instead of the VP? Anyways, you proved me wrong. Sorry for the revert. Regards. Gadig 07:37, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again but I just went to do some searches to verify if I didn't image the word deputy when I read some of the news. Look what I found (I know that these are not govenment sites but you can see where my confusion came from):

• http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/olmert.html
• http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/QA.jhtml?qaNo=100
• http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/11318

This is quite odd. Gadig 07:48, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Yep, these all made the same mistake as you did. Meaning you are in very distinguished company. I also mentioned that it is quite confusing. How come? One of the reasons for confusion may be that in some or even most countries there are no separate functions of deputy and vice premier. In these cases the words may be used interchangeably. Your other question: the Vice Prime Minister is selected to be the replacement of the Prime Minister when something happens to him. The President is formally more like the "boss" of the Premier: he is the head of state. "Under" him serve the three heads of the three branches: legislative (in Israel the Knesset) is the Chair of the Knesset, executive (Government) - the prime minister, judicial - the president of the Israeli high court. In Israel the Chair of the Knesset also functions as vice president, but is not called that way. Under comes in quotation marks because all four institutions are separate and the premier has most actual power. Best regards, gidonb 08:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Shira Manor

you might wnt to look at Shira Manor - trying to get the teenage lover POV in through the backdoor. Agathoclea 16:13, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I will check it out. Regards, gidonb 01:00, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

You have a point with POV. It sort of resembles a POV fork; since the POV was not allowed in one article it has been taken to another one. Still, I have marked the article for cleanup in order to give Haham hanuka a fair chance of improving the article by getting rid of the fork and showing through the article's content and links why Shira Manor is noteworthy in her own right. I am keeping an open mind for any outcomes. Regards, gidonb 02:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

"teenage lover POV" - it's a fact not a POV. --Haham hanuka 18:59, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Germany

I'm not the only one who reverted your edits there, pls use talk page if you want to add text. --Haham hanuka 21:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Don't turn yourself even more into a joke. You reverted me after there was an edit war going on there and made a very false accusations against me. You wrote proudly in your edit summary that I broke 3RR (i.e. four times restored a text in 24 hours), linked with a wiki and what not, while I had once restored the previous text in the last 24 hours. And then you have the cheeck to abuse the project's page to claim that I personally attack you. Yeah right. gidonb 00:50, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I kept thinking about leaving you a message as well. I have to agree that the main Germany article is overloaded and details of all the lengthy sections should spill into the sub-articles. That is a process I will support myself as and when I have time to do so. Just a point looking at the last revert diff: The shorter version is sharp to the point and will get people to look up the subarticle wheras the overloaded version will just loose peoples attentionspan. I think you want to get the point accross? Don't loose the focus of that goal by squabling on wordcounts. Agathoclea 21:21, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Agathoclea, this is the old text on the holocaust and is proportionate to rest of the indeed lengthy history of Germany. I only improved the last sentence of the paragraph. The diminished holocaust is totally disproportionate and very unflattering for Germany and the Germans if you compare it to the courageous country article on the United States for example. I am partially of German descent and a proponent of courage so I should care. gidonb 00:50, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Sofar no-one reverted your last edit, so it looks like a compromise between brevity and detail has been achieved. Hope you won't be on a break for too long. Somebody has got to put in a AFD at a certain article .... Agathoclea 20:26, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

(after an edit conflict) I just fixed the new speak. Personally I think that this version is a disgrace even after I fixed this and I know it will get eroded further. Just a short while ago the holocaust was not mentioned. People use sockpuppets to whitewash Germany's history and make racist accusations or delete any mentioning of anything. Then they dissappear and open a new account. In the meantime I am victimized against by an administrator who is utterly confused by the personal attacks on me. I may restore the older version that also has its weaknesses. I will wait and see if the community can pull together improvements for one time. As you know, I wrote neither paragraph and am quite disgusted by the eagerness of certain people to diminish events in German history and to put me down as Germany hating Jew. A well known "warrior" immediately seized the opportunity to entirely delete the Herero genocide from the page. If I had restored it you know exactly what the reaction would be. Against me, who has contributed so much to this article. My family is from Jever but to them we are just Jews. Some people can never think beyond the box of their national pride. It is very sad and un-Wikipedian as well. Why can the German editors not take an example from the honest article on the United States of America and other country articles? I think Germans should care about having the good and the bad clearly included in the article, just like the Americans seem to care. You should personally reconsider your behavior as well. gidonb 21:13, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Gidonb, you should drink a glass of cold water and then reconsider your break. The one who should take a break is certainly not you, and don't let him feel as if he succeeded in his harassment. Keep on the good work, even if it's sometimes frustrating. Noon 20:59, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. gidonb 21:13, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Gidonb. I agree that the Holocaust needs an adequate description on the Germany page. However, the version you just reverted from seems to provide the important points (that it was organized, industrial mass-murder with about 10 million victims). Indeed, you even contributed to it, which I understood as a kind of support for (or at least acceptance of) the shortened version. I can understand that the repeated deletion of all details annoys you. But I don't think retaliatory over-reverting is a solution. Apparently, even User:Haham hanuka was willing to let the core facts (and most of the wording) stand. Don't you think we can agree on that basis? Apparently even you agree that the overall history is to long. So let's make a start at a shorter, but not watered-down version. --Stephan Schulz 12:20, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Stephan, I will think the answer over a bit. Regards, gidonb 00:34, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Stephan, sorry for keeping you wait. I will answer the more relevant parts:

You even contributed to it, which I understood as a kind of support for (or at least acceptance of) the shortened version...Don't you think we can agree on that basis?

I actually objected, but believe that the shortened version would be adequate for the shortened version of Germany's history. Now Germany's history is very long and the holocaust seems to be the only thing that gets ever shorter.

I can understand that the repeated deletion of all details annoys you...Apparently even you agree that the overall history is to long. So let's make a start at a shorter, but not watered-down version.

I do not just agree, but claim for a long time that the article and especially its history section are way too long. I have written about this quite a bit and have shortened the history section by perhaps 40% in the past. I would like to emphasize that in the Germany article and all others I am not a "one issue" contributor. I have made lasting contributions to the Germany article, totally unrelated to the holocaust. But you are right, the continuous erosion of this particular chapter does annoy. I believe that by applying the current version for the long text and your version for a radically shortened text, we can keep the holocaust at all times proportionate to the rest of the article.

Please see also my other remarks above and on the talk:Germany page. Also, even though we partially agree and one can always see the empty or full half glass, I do appreciate your efforts with respect to the Germany page. Especially I appreciated that you confronted a user with his racism related remarks towards me and I have written this also on the administrators' notice board. Unfortunately such users keep attacking, smudging, disappearing and reappearing under new identities, sockpuppets and IPs. If I accept the generous offer for administrator nomination, opposers will have plenty to quote ;-) Best regards, gidonb 22:16, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Amnon Itzhak

Amnon Itzhak is considered a symbol of religious-secular war in Israel for predominance. This theme must be developped, and not skimmed! Please don't delete paragraphs at the article next time. Narshavs 22:03, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello Narshavs, do you have serious references? If so please add them to the text. Regards, gidonb 00:31, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Just another RFA thank you note

Dear Gidon, I appreciate your vote and your kind words in my RFA. It has passed with an unexpected 114/2/2 and I feel honored by this show of confidence in me. Cheers! ←Humus sapiens ну? 03:29, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

You are most welcome. I am happy you made it and very impressed by the score! You deserve it. gidonb 19:54, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to the Armenian Genocide page

I am looking foreward to your involvement in this issue. I think you are just the sort of person that is needed to perhaps break some of the deadlocks we have been experiencing. Please take the time to scan the talk pages and archives - I think that this is important for you to understand and place issues (and contributor personalities) in context. I think that the article can and should be greatly improved. IMO it is paramount that the article be both historically accurate as well as avoid cheap and unsupported material. Additionally, it requires much better historical context - both within the Ottoman Empire and related to its politics and culture (and the context of the Armenian genocide in the transformation of such) and also including the issue of the denial to the present day. I find it shameful that Wikipedia has in a sense become party to denial of this genocide. The facts of this case are in fact readily accesible and accepted within the scholarly community as a whole. We cannot let a few Turkish hyper-nationalists hold this most important historical issue hostage. I am hoping that you will be able to contribute and bring your aparent sanity with you. I applaud your sucess in getting the Holocaust included in the German history article. Likewise the Armenain Genocide needs to be referenced in both the Turkish history and WWI articles - at a minimum. Considering its historical importance - and that it was the premier human rights issue of WWI (that essentially created the category of international human rights) it deserves a much greater role in the article concerning that conflict (which seems biased towards military battles and such at this time just in general). Unfortunatly I am too much a Wikipedia newbie to know how to proceed to get the Armenian Genocide properly included and referenced in these articles and I have no clue how we might achieve success getting it integrated into the Turkish history (and related) articles...your sucess regarding the Holocaust gives me some hope that you may know how to proceed in these matters. Again, looking foreward to your participation. --THOTH 02:12, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

THOTH, thank you for your warm words. I hope I deserve them. I have been somewhat active at this page in the past. Most importantly, I have given the decisive vote for deleting the pov message and fought vandalism on this page. I also contributed to discussions on the talk page. I did not yet get around to improve the contents, except for the categorization. I hope I will find more time soon. Best regards, gidonb 18:58, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I was not aware of these things...thank you...as you know - if you have been involved in this issue at all - Armenians and seekers of truth and justice in this matter have had to deal with immense and difficult oposition rooted in the Turkish Government's official denial campaign and the promulgation of false nationalistic history among its population. The denial of the Armenian Genocide is a most shameful and hurtful thing to us and I'm sure you can appreciate our feelings on this matter and our intense desire that the true story of these events be properly portrayed. --THOTH 04:42, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Decent

I was not implying in any way that Iraq was evil and should not be listed as David Sassoon;s home country. I thought that since he lived most of his life in India and that he was part of a key Indian Jewish community of several Middle Eastern sources, I thought it would be best addressing that he was of the country where his ethnicity was centered. Nevetheless I understand that he was of Baghdadi origin always, and perhaps it's better this way. But I never implied that being from Iraq was something to be ashamed of. I respect Iraq and Arab culture greatly. -User: Afghan Historian

Of course you did not mean to imply anything negative about Iraq. The word should have been descent. I apologize omitting a key letter!!! The name at the end should be the descent; if it was the country of birth or country where the person operated most of her/his life - it would for nearly all be Israel. The idea is to tie these persons also somewhat to their countries of origin and also to their respective communities in Israel (India/UK in few cases), to the extend that such communities exist and the people in question hold any ties with them. Best regards and keep up the good work! gidonb 11:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Israeli Rabbis

I'm very sorry if deleting the Israeli rabbis category was a bad move. However, since Amnon Yitzhak was the sole inhabitant of that category - and there are a least 3 more Rabbinical categories into which he could fit, I deemed it unecessary. Additionally, since there are Rabbis of virtually every nationality, it would be nigh impossible and impractical to categorise them based on such a factor. How would one decide what nationality Maimonides was - or a Rabbi whose birthplace is uncertain - or a Rabbi born in a defunct country/ country where borders changed eg Lithuania now Poland - or a Rabbi born in South Africa, moved to Israel but now living in USA - or a Rabbi in the Talmud/Mishna?. If you have practical answers to these questions and a strong motivation to categorise Rabbis basedon nationality, please let me know. In any event, I will not delete categories in future without prior consultation. Thank you Nesher 18:57, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

PS: I'm quite sorry - I didnt realise you only started the category yesterday! Nevertheless please access its practicality. Also, contrary to what you might think, I've been using wikipedia for a few months now and have written several articles already. See my homepage...

Hi Nesher, there is no need to apologize, you clearly meant no harm. Now that we communicate everything is fine. I agree that the category is most useful for the more recent rabbis. But just as scientists who lived before modern states organized get claimed by today's countries, it is not inconceivable that the same will sometimes happen to rabbis. Many times of these categories are organized by persons who take special interest in the history of their countries or countries to which they can somehow relate. I can't see anything wrong with that. Rabbis contributed to culture and ethics almost worldwide. I wish that people of many nationalities may take some pride in these rabbis. I appreciate your efforts, already a few months, at writing these biographies and sharing your knowledge with the community. Best regards, gidonb 20:02, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Please move the discussion to Category talk:Orthodox rabbis. --Shuki 20:56, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello Shuki, thank you for refering me to this discussion. The main point of the discussion here was really the rabbis by nation category (for Israel at this stage). I left my 2 cents about the contemporary rabbis category on the orthodox rabbis talk page. gidonb 21:49, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Léon-Bernard Giot

Just for your information, I wanted to let you know that I've nominated this article for deletion due to a number of issues, which are outlined on the discussion page and the deletion page. As an anglophone who lives in France, this is clearly a case of "autopromotion" and this fellow's name and his school keeps popping up in all sorts of odd places on the French version of Wikipédia. If you read French, please have a look at the article's "PàS" entry [10] for more information. Musikfabrik 15:43, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

In the AfD discussions for this article, someone has made the point that this person has slightly more citations in Dutch language search engines than in English language search engines. I noticed on the edit history for the Dutch article that you had done a number of edits. I'm wondering if you might be able to comment on this person's notability in Dutch on the AfD discussion here? He clearly does not meet the criteria for inclusion in English or French, but perhaps the picture changes in Dutch. Thanks in advance. Musikfabrik 09:40, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Musikfabrik, the Dutch Wikipedia is not equally strict with notability. LBG is a part-time musician position who apparently also gives some lessons. He pointed out on the talk page that the title "Professor" is not protected, i.e. anyone can carry it. He uses the name International whatever school to describe his lesson practice. Personally, I do not believe that this is the best way to promote art. He has had second thoughts as well, because in the past he asked to delete the talk page for his Dutch article. It has been archived, with which he is unhappy. The article here is a promotional text, full of exaggerations. It was created after he had placed a request to be included in en.wikipedia. At his website there are some clippings from the local press, mostly about his ideas on better breathing. He suggested he should become minister of breathing of Belgium or one of the states. This attracted mild interest from the local press. gidonb 10:16, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello! Well, that sort of confirms what I suspected. This obviously doesn't indicate notability under EN Wikipedia policies, but once the article exists in one language, it's very difficult to get it off of other languages. Since Mr. Giot is a francophone, he has a habit of adding his name and the name of his school to anything concerning singing and breathing, which is what brought this to our attention in the first place. I notice too that he hasn't added articles for every member of his family, as he has in the French version. So, the article here is only a mild nuisance, whereas in the French version, it's become a major pain. It seems to us that we had to bring the question up in other languages as well in order to get a clear response on the notability issue. Thank you for clarifying this. Bes wishes. Musikfabrik 13:14, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Musikfabrik, Mr. Giot also writes in perfect Dutch. He has created several articles about musicians he took lessons with, one about the Giot family in general and perhaps a few more. I NPOVd these at the Dutch Wikipedia. Patience is a helpful attribute when editing Wikipedias. I say this to strenghten you in all your efforts here and at fr.wikpedia. Best regards, gidonb 16:27, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Italy

Thanks for the welcome. I am interested in Italian and European related articles. Are you a paisan? Cal Burrattino 21:01, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Benvenuto Cal! No, I am not a Paisan. I think I reverted vandalism on Italy and keep an eye on the article since. I have travelled Italy and loved the country and its people. Enjoy en.wikipedia and let me know if I can help you with anything! Best regards, gidonb 21:09, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Personal Attacks

Hi, you wrote and welcomed me to Wikipedia when I joined and I called on you once for assistance. I have been editing a very contentious page, and a few of us have been just attacked I think unfairly and competely unapologeticly by a group of administrators and others. I am leaving Wikipedia because of this. I just wanted to tell someone. elizmr 21:30, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry to hear that. I know all about contentious pages. I will check things out. Best regards, gidonb 21:33, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

The page is Juan Cole. elizmr 21:37, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I clicked on it when the orange appeared. gidonb 21:39, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean by Orange? elizmr 21:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

The orange background of you have a new message. I will have to let it rest for today, perhaps even the weekend. Shabbat dinner comming up and I do not want to get into trouble with my boss. I promise to keep an eye on the developements and perhaps raise it elsewehere, if I think there is any use. I think you are doing a very good job here in your fields of expertise. People often confuse expertise for opion promoting but these are very different. I hope you will stay. Best regards, gidonb 21:44, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh now I get it. Please have a great Shabbat---I am very sorry to trouble you with this as the sun is setting. I was so upset over what happened. Thanks for the nice words. The environment is hard for me. elizmr 21:59, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Afd

Just letting you know - I replied to you vote on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Irfan_Yusuf. I question the assumption that all candidates in national elections are notable. --Tango 16:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I happened to see it and answered already. Best regards, gidonb 16:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Orthodox Rabbinical Biography Collaboration of the Week

Hi Gidonb, I've created an Orthodox Rabbinical Biography Collaboration of the Week. I'd love to see your comments, improvements, amendations and nominations, preferably all on the discussion or the actual page there. Many thanks, Nesher 13:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Nesher, thank you for thinking of me. I will take a look! Best regards, gidonb 14:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Dear Gidonb — Thank you for your support on my recent RfA. It succeeded with a final tally of 72/2/0 and I am now an administrator. I'll be taking things slowly at first and getting used to the new tools, but please let me know if there's any adminnery I can help you with in the future. —Whouk (talk) 18:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you and good luck! Regards, gidonb 18:18, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Category:Anti-Semitic people

Vote They are attempting to close the +cat AGAIN, please vote to KEEP. SirIsaacBrock 10:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello SirIsaacBrock, thank you for notifying me about this vote. I did participate. Regards, gidonb 12:20, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Meir Kahane

We've had discussions about his felony convictions, and only did find some in the USA, not Israel. Besides, even if true, that does not entitle you to rmv cat:israeli activists! That would be vandalism. If you have info on Israeli felony convictions, do please post it to the talk page, and then add cat, but not at the expense of another. Thanks. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 22:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Oops! Yeah I used the activists category to recreate the criminals category, but forgot to duplicate it. Sorry about that. The information about his convictions is already on the talk page. If you have other information, I'd be happy to read about it. I will take a look at the talk page to see if you responded to the list of convictions. gidonb 23:27, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup!

Thank you, Gidonb/Archive 2006! Thank you for voting for my recent RfA, which passed (to my extreme surprise and shock) with a total tally of 66/15/2. For that, I would like to thank you and offer a helping hand in any admin-related tasks that may be required -- it's as simple as leaving a message on my talkpage. Thanks again! -→Buchanan-Hermit™/!? 22:29, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

You are most welcome. Congratulations! gidonb 22:33, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the Tireless Contributor Barnstar award

Dear Gidon: Please accept my thanks and appreciation for awarding me the Tireless Contributor Barnstar. Always nice to get a "Purple Heart" ("Victoria Cross"?) under fire! All the best, IZAK 19:36, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi IZAK! You are most welcome and really deserve it!!! Take a deep breath and continue your melechet hakodesh! Best regards, gidonb 22:23, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Occupation of Norway by Nazi Germany

Greetings! Should be fixed now. Cheers!  :-) Antandrus (talk) 23:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Best regards, gidonb 00:02, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Orthodox rabbis categories for deletion

Hi Gidon: Please see and vote at

1. Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 23#Category:Haredi rabbis
2. Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 23#Category:Religious Zionist Orthodox rabbis
3. Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 23#Category:Contemporary Orthodox rabbis
4. Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 24#Category:Modern Orthodox rabbis

Thank you and Shabbat Shalom! IZAK 12:29, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Baruch Goldstein

Dear Gidonb Please let me know why you deleted my contribution to the "Talk: Baruch Goldstein"? Is it any less relevant than the other contributions which appear on this talk page? Simonschaim 11:34, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello Simonschaim, the reason I trimmed the text was in the edit summary. Sorry, I cannot promise there was not one single contribution that was less relevant to the edit process than your contribution (which I may have overlooked). That said, your contribution was definitely between the less relevant ones to the content of the page. Please follow the Wikipedia policies while you are here. If you would like to promote your personal opinions then you will be better off at a web-forum. Enjoy Wikipedia, I will insert a welcoming message if it hasn't been done yet. The links in such a message are helpful for the editing process. Regards, gidonb 16:25, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Did you not delete another user's comments? If that isn't censoring I don't know what is. —Aiden 17:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Dear Gidonb: I was rather dismayed to read your "reasons" for deleting my contribution to the talkpage on Baruch Goldstein. These you stated to be that they were my "personal opinion" and that they were irrelevant to the article on Baruch Goldstein.

However reading through one of your contributions to this very same talkpage you wrote "Goldstein was a terrorist". Since no Court of Law has found him guilty of being a terrorist, this is YOUR PERSONAL OPINION! In addition, if it is RELEVANT for you to make such a comment on the talkpage, it is NO LESS relevant for me to bring the counter view.

You also mention "Wikipedia policies". If you would study the "Key Policies of Wikipedia" you would see that one of them is "Respect other Contributors". However despite this you totally removed my contribution and when "Aiden" accused you of "censoring talk pages" you classed this as an "unpleasant accusation".

I consider my contribution to this talkpage no less relevant than your contributions and I am therefore restoring it. Simonschaim 08:30, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

My contribution specifically discussed the categorization of the article, while there was disagreement about it on the main page. Your contribution did not relate to the edit process. Therefor it was removed. This has nothing to do with respect. I respect all contributors. However, if we are not tough sometimes on the information dumped at talk pages, they become one big mess. gidonb 10:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

gidonb, article Talk pages exists so that users can offer their views on the article and the article's subject. Policies like WP:NPOV and WP:NOT apply to articles not Talk pages. It is not up to another editor to decide what should be censored and what should remain on a Talk page. It is very impolite to remove another user's comments from a Talk page, save for vandalism. Please refrain from doing so. —Aiden 14:17, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Many editors do this all the time. The talk pages are meant for discussing the editorial process and not meant for dumping/promoting personal opinions and websites. Per WP:NOT no part of Wikipedia is, although on personal talk pages this is usually allowed. Without bold editors all article's talk pages would eventually clog. Please refrain from making unfriendly allegations. Remember, I challenged you to provide one policy that underwrites that any text unrelated to the editorial process on talk pages should be kept there. So far you have not delivered. You only made new accusations. gidonb 16:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

New "Israeli apartheid" article

Hi Gidon: Vigorous editing and debate is taking place at Israeli apartheid (phrase). Please take a look at it and add your comments. Thanks a lot. IZAK 20:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Vanity page?

Hi Gidon, Thanks for the greeting on my talk page. I'm taking you up on your invitation for help. In my perusal of Wikipedia, I have come across a page to my mind appears to be a vanity page. However, being so new to editing, I am reluctant to report it. I requested citations for the Mrozinski article, but my requests were deleted. The most outrageous unverified statement was taken out, but the whole thing still seems like a vanity page to me. Would you care to offer a second opinion? GentlemanGhost 07:01, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello GentlemanGhost, you are most welcome! I am glad to see that you are so active. The article did look like a vanity page. However, I made some changes: deleted some links, added biographic details, downplayed the ravings and restored some of the requests for sources. You are correct that the verification of these claims may make the difference between notability and non-notability. Please feel free to restore additional templates and answer him on the talk page, if you desire. If the templates are removed again or remain unanswered, take action. From now on, I will try to keep an eye on this page, but if I miss something please buzz again! Best regards, gidonb 11:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I worked on this some more and AfDd 24/24 World Concert. gidonb 13:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for helping! I didn't want to overstep my bounds (or for that matter start a tedious Wiki-war). A second pair of eyes helps with objectivity. GentlemanGhost 02:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

About Jewish Holidays index

I've added 2 Judaism : *Judaism Info Center - Jewish Holidays index. The URL is working perfectly. Tnx.

It does now. Must have been a momentary problem at either end. My excuses for the inconvenience. gidonb 02:23, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

FYI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Israeli_apartheid_%28phrase%29

Sorry, I had already voted. Cheers, gidonb 19:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

A haiku of thanks

Thanks for your support

In my RfA, which passed!

Wise I'll try to be.

Thanks for your positive comments, I hope to live up to the potential you spoke of!

-- Natalya 04:38, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Mrozinski

Please leave the deletion notices for my article (Mrozinski). No disrespect intended but my personal info has been edited repeatedly and erroneously, and I want the article deleted. Please comply with my wishes. Mrozinski 14:43, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I already wrote that I am going to List this article for deletion. First have to take the kids out. If you want to do it yourself, be my guest. gidonb 15:15, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Let's get this page off. It seems to have been the target of interest for people with no stake in its content. Now they can move on to objects of more legitimate concern and leave me alone. I do not know why everyone insisted on editing a page which is about me, but I guess I should be flattered. I hope they are happy to find someone else to harrass. Mrozinski 16:39, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I moved this comment from your userpage to your talk page. --Zpb52 21:29, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. gidonb 22:10, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Please stop proclaiming yourself as a self-appointed watchdog of information and keep your misguided opinions to yourself. God is the judge, not you. Mrozinski 21:28, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

At Wikipedia, the editors watch the information together. I think you are confused about Wikipedia, its aims and methods. I am sorry about that. gidonb 22:10, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

You sadly overstimate your own importance. I can't explain your obsession with me, but back off and live your own life, such as it is. Mrozinski 02:11, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

See answer above. I am sorry that Wikipedia did not answer all your publicity expectations. gidonb 11:39, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Template:User wife

Hi, I notice that you are using Template:User wife, which has been moved to {{User:UBX/wife}}. The link currently being used on your page is a cross-namespace redirect and will probably not last. It may be advisable to change the link. Thanks. —Mira 05:54, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi MiraLuka, thank you for notifying me. I looked for the correct userbox (*later clarification: in Wikipedia space*), but it wasn't there. Unless you object I will keep it until it is gone and then I'll remove it. gidonb 09:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello again, I've fixed it up for you. Happy editing! —Mira 17:28, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello MiraLuka, thank you very much. Often I get complicated directions where to find stuff, but you did everything for me. What a service! Many thanks, gidonb 23:07, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

AfD

I agree that the points raised merit wider attention and debate. Where do you suggest? Talk page for AfD perhaps? I am concerned at the adverse image created by careless/flippant/insulting remarks which seem to be quite acceptable now on AfD (I am not referring to you by the way). Tyrenius 02:49, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

New Category:Sephardic Orthodox rabbis

Hi Gidonb, you'll be pleased to know that I've created a new, objective category - Sephardic Orthodox rabbis. Unlike many other recently created categories that have been bitterly disputed, this category doesn't rank Rabbonim by how Frum they are or their political beliefs. In short, it's absolutely impossible to argue why any of the Rabbis have been placed in it - because of course they're all Sephardi. I hope you like it and that this simplifies matters. Many thanks, Nesher 16:12, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I was not in favor of the Sephardi Haredi rabbis category. In the meantime it has been approved and your new category is consistent with it, only one level nearer to the hierarchy root. Thus it makes good sense. Thanks for the notification and keep up the good work! gidonb 01:53, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Neama Nativ

Sure, thanks for the notification! Cheers, Sango123 01:44, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Anytime ;-) gidonb 01:53, 21 June 2006 (UTC)