Jump to content

User talk:Humus sapiens/archive11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


IDF

Hey, let's suppose that what I added to Israel Defense Forces article is not appropriate to be put in the intro, why did you delete it completely from the article? -- Marquez 14:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I've just skimmed the entire article, and don't see under what existing or possible other heading such content might be appropriately included, as it's not intrinsically about the IDF. It pertains more to something along the lines of "Israel in world opinion", section: "foreign media" subsection: "Arab world". HTH, Deborahjay 03:27, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

On the Jews and Their Lies

I would appreciate you looking in on the recent additions Doright has made to the article, my improvements, his reverts, etc. I'd like your opinion on my actions in the matter, and, if you find his behavior out of line, having you say something to him. Thanks! Bob--CTSWyneken 19:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Death Valley Driver Video Review

Hi! The entry for Death Valley Driver Video Review keeps being listed for deletion by one user, who refuses to abide by the previous consensus determinations. He has listed the article AGIn for deletion, depite the last one being held only 11 days ago that he also listed. This user User:JB196 has a personal situation with the people who run the site that this entry refers to, and is the only real reason he keeps trying to have the article deleted. It keeps surviving the attempts, and it is getting VERY tiring to have to go through it all again. I forgot to mention that JB196 is also the creator of the entry for TheSmarks.com, which is a direct competitor to Death Valley Driver Video review Please advise or quash the Afd. TruthCrusader 08:02, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

DVDR

Hi. I will not bother responding to TruthCrusader, as he has violated WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF many times in the past. TheSmartMarks.com is in no way a "competitor" to DVDR. Nor do I have a "personal situation" with DVDR. The reason I am contacting you is because I saw your message on the afD and I am inquiring as to when it will be allowed to relist it for nomination? Thanks in advance.

EDIT: Sir, also note that your message says "unless a discussion had no consensus and a marked lack of contributors." I am the only contributor to DVDR so there is a "marked lack of contributors." Regards.JB196 10:48, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Caleb and the Jew Watch article

Caleb has been warned again and again (and again and again), yet he continues to make edits that are POV/Vandalism. Some edits seem like they may be slightly POV, but good intentioned, while others, like changing "Jew Watch is a website that claims it reports accurate information..." to "Jew Watch is a website that reports accurate information..." are obviously not. At what point is it appropriate to move forward, and give him more serious warning, with the threat of a ban? si»abhorreo»T 11:12, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Caleb Here

you have my reply at my talk page.

Caleb Parks 19:45, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

CrazyRussian's RfA

File:Motherussia.jpg Hello Humus sapiens, Shalom Chaver, Zdorovo Drug, and thank you for your support at my request for adminship, which ended with an awe-inspiring 86/1/2 result. I plan to do much with my shiny new tools - but I'll start slow and learn the ropes at first. Please deluge me with assignments and requests - I enjoy helping out. For Mother Russia!! - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 04:52, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Mohammed Ahmadinejad

I see that I recently received a kind of backhanded but unjustified praise -- in the form of an absurd attack for "vandalism" -- for your recent, excellent edits to Mohammed Ahmadinejad. See the Talk page, bottom.--Mantanmoreland 15:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Humus. Fruitless, Usenet-style debates such as the one on the Ahmadinejad talk page make me want to run back to my novel stubs! I now see why people avoid the hot-button topics.--Mantanmoreland 00:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


User:Ghirlandajo

has seen fit to start making threatsover a user dispute at Oleg. I have done my best to be reasonable but his trollism and pattern of vandalism (see also Oleg of Novgorod is driving me to distraction (to the minimal extent it's possible to be upset by virtual interactions with people I've never met). Your counsel and assistance would be greatly appreciated. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 12:38, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Ghirlandajo is a continuing problem from what I've seen. His edits reflect a rabid, jingoistic, and parochial Russian and pan Slavic bias. 71.199.196.105 03:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

JE citations

any thoughts? --Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 12:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Doright deletes three formal warnings from his talk page

Would you please warn Doright that he should not remove formal personal attack warnings from his talk page? If he attacks once more, I intend to put a note on the Administrator's intervention board and these warnings are required. I am tired of these personal attacks on me and others. --CTSWyneken 21:11, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Looking at it again, I'm not sure who deleted the info. But its back now... --CTSWyneken 00:26, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks! I'll look in on Rosin's page. I sure hope he'll play by the rules.
On Doright, one more personal attack I see from him, I will list him on the Personal Attacks incident board. It is about time an admin takes action against his slash-and-burn methods. --CTSWyneken 00:40, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Israel Delisted as GA

I was wondering if you had any input on the delisting. Cheers, TewfikTalk 23:57, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Oops....

I guess I neglected to "spam" you! My apologies.-Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 20:39, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Better late than never --Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 20:43, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

My Comments on Rosen's Page

Dear Humus: My comments on his page are intended to convince him to play by the rules. I am not at all making any kind of antisemitic comment. Can you imagine what Doright would say to his POV? Or what PTMcCain might say to a Christian apostate, if I cannot keep him away from his dark side? I suspect that, to say the least, you have a negative reaction to Rosen. Much the same as I would have for Christian becoming a Mormon sharing his views on the superiority of the LDS. The true test of tolerance on Wikipedia is to treat them fairly, if not warmly. In his case, open advocacy of his POV is likely to test the limits. So I intend to watch him to see that he stays within the lines if he stays at all. --CTSWyneken 00:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

DVD+R/W's RfA

Thank you for your support in my RfA, which ended with the result of (74/0/0). If there is anything I can help with feel free to ask. Also, if there is anything I am doing wrong, please point that out as well. I look forward to working with you in the future.

Highest regards, DVD+ R/W 01:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Heads up

Heads up on this user[1].Timothy Usher 01:42, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, for that among other things including vandalizing my userpage. One week. When the block on the IP expired, he returned under the new username.Timothy Usher 02:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
He's not a sockpuppet. BhaiSaab talk 03:37, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
What's with the new username? Why did he choose to take down the alternate account notice? The puppetmaster template is inappropriate here.Timothy Usher 03:40, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
He is not using his new account to do anything that is against policy or any other questionable activities (such as trying to go around the 3rr rule). BhaiSaab talk 04:06, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, what is it for? And why did he take down the alternate account notice? The current template simply doesn't apply, and crucially does not show the name of his other account. If I had to guess, I'd say he was running away from his block log, as suggested by this comment.Timothy Usher 04:11, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
I'd also like to call your attention to this link which BhaiSaab wanted to use to make an article "neutral".Timothy Usher 11:23, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
You really have some problems, Timothy. BhaiSaab talk 18:39, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Bantustan again

Please don't keep adding pro- or con- arguments to the section on usages outside of SA. The section was only ever intended to document the existence of these usages, not to present articles for or against them. WP:RS doesn't apply in this context - everyone agrees that the term is used (which is all the paragraph in question says) so there's no "opposing POV" to present. Unless you're arguing that someone denies that the term is used at all in an Israeli context? I'd like to see your evidence for that proposition!

You should have noticed that the section doesn't make any comment at all on whether the Israeli usage is justified. If you add an argument against the Israeli use, you're favouring your own POV, because you then haven't presented the opposite POV. That's just a recipe for creating yet another forked article and another Israeli-Palestinian edit war. It's also very inconsistent to have arguments presented for just one of the examples listed. I'm trying to keep the article focused - if you want to add arguments for or against the usage of the word, please take them to a more relevant article, such as Israeli apartheid or Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Bantustan is not an appropriate article in which to debate the merits of the comparison. -- ChrisO 02:06, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for finding an acceptable compromise. But I have to say that I'm perturbed by your approach to this question. You clearly have a strong POV on the issue but you as an administrator, of all people, should know by now that WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a soapbox: "Wikipedia articles are not propaganda or advocacy of any kind." It's simply not our job to "refute a slanderous accusation" or for that matter to promote it. All we are here to do is to describe neutrally what others say about the issue. WP:NPOV#A simple formulation states it better than I could - "assert facts, including facts about opinions — but don't assert opinions themselves".
This is really basic stuff. Frankly I'm surprised and dismayed that I'm finding myself having to explain it to a fellow administrator, even a relatively new one. Wikipedia has more than enough partisan editors - as administrators, we should be pushing for objectivity, not pushing our own partisan POVs. If you hold a strong POV on an issue, that's all the more reason for consciously trying to avoid letting it colour your editing. -- ChrisO 09:01, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

The most useless type of edit

This tag means nothing. I'll e-mail you why: [3] Zeq 13:26, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Hafrada

I have done a potential rewrite of this article in my user-space here. Please tell me what you think. The history starts with the current "live" version so you can compare the changes. In fact if you think it will work with some tweaking, please feel free to do so right on that page and then let me know. 6SJ7 17:44, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

There is some elaboration in your e-mail. 6SJ7 19:48, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Hanukkah.

Hello, Humus Sapiens. I have many questions about Hanukkah. I know that Hanukkah is celebration of Judaism. It is usually between November and December. I'm just curious about Hanukkah. In my opinion, Hanukkah is like Thanksgiving day because both Hanukkah and Thanksgivingday is in November of December. Did I guess right? I'm not sure about Hanukkah. What kinds of Celebration is Hanukkah? Or What kinds of food do they usually eat in Hanukkah? Could you explain to me everything that I asked you about Hanukkah in my discussion's page? Thanks. *~Daniel~* 06:40, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

The tag really helps solve Homey's article - not

[4] Zeq 03:49, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Category:Israeli propaganda

Hi Humus: Meet the new Category:Israeli propaganda. All the best, IZAK 08:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I need to e-mail you

tnx. Zeq 03:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Persistent vandal

Please take a look at Nagara373's activities. I also suspect there is an IP sockpuppet. --Dweller 10:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Gibraltar

I would like to ask you a favour. Could you please have a look at the talk page and history of the article on Gibraltar. Over the past few months a number of users, including myself, have been in conflict with user:Gibnews. We feel he has taken over the page as his pet project and has imposed a NPOV pro-Gibraltarian point of view. I feel his attitude and utter refusal to acheive any form of consensus is contrary to the rules of wikipedia. He accuses everyone of Spanish propaganda even on issues which are not directly related to the Anglo-Spanish dispute over Gibraltar and reverts pretty much everything which is not written by himself. Although I am not Spanish, I sometimes wonder if I may be slightly biased towards the Spanish perspective. I do not however believe that Gibraltar should be Spanish and I try to remain as neutral as possible. I do not have a problem with Gibnew's views. I simply do not approve of his way of discarding other people's sources, opinions etc... You should perhaps consult other users for their opinions such as user:ecemaml and user:asterion.

That is why I ask you, as an uninterested party, to mediate or atleast give your perspective on this issue.

Please look at the talk page over the past few months. Conflict with user Gibnews seems to go a long way back.

Thankyou very much for your help. We would really appreciate it. There is nothing worse that when articles are hijacked by individuals with political agendas. --Burgas00 13:47, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

FYI

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150355528268&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Hey

(Now if I've understood this correctly, I'm supposed to reply what people write to me in 'their' talk pages and not my own, right? Anyway, I've now replied both here and in my own talk page.)

The reply:

I apologize for making the assumption. You expect me to behave a certain way because of how the Germans practiced National Socialism. Everyone has their own interpretation of the ideology and mine is a lot more liberal than most. I believe in the Holocaust and that the German National Socialists commited such atrocities, and I could never do the same. But I do question the number and I pretty much agree with everything in that "spam link" I posted before. Paulus Caesar 05:16, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

This is an outragous edit

Humus - why did you do that . [5] you know that there is no "apartheid" in east jerusalem and that all/most palestinians just want to become jerusalem residents see how many of them file petitions against the wall to make sure they would be included in the israeli side of the jerusalem wall.)

everything you added there in analogy section is a bunch of propeganda. If you want to NPOV - please NPOV each sentence don't leave this whole section to stand out like this please. Zeq 10:41, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I respect what you do

but this was a mistake. you should be repsonsible for your edits no matter where they came from.

we spent weeks analyzing the sources and in one minute you restore one sided POV claims that some come from non-WP:RS sources. Zeq 20:05, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Your Comment To Me

Despite what you may consider "nonsense", my comments and edits are based on FACTS. I can back up every single thing I post here. So, if you have a question on anything, feel free to contact me with evidence backing up your position. --Jtpaladin 03:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

My comments are factual

I don't know where you are getting your information but I would I appreciate you giving me a source to support your conclusions. Please, no Israeli or Jewish sources. We can go around all day with that nonsense. If you are going to use Dio Cassius, then please show me a link from a historical source.

Despite what you may consider "nonsense", my comments and edits are based on FACTS. I can back up every single thing I post here. So, if you have a question on anything, feel free to contact me with evidence backing up your position. --Jtpaladin 03:08, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I verified your info and I would ask you do the same

I'm going to quote the "Jewish Encyclopedia" in the case of Cyrene and Cyprus regarding Gentile deaths, as per Cassius Dio.

Also, can you please tell me how to add a "TALK?" after my signature so it links to my talk page? I have followed the proper format but all I keep getting is a non-hyper link "TALK?". Any help would be appreciated. Lastly, I hope we can be friends. Thank you. --Jtpaladin 16:45, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Response: [6] ←Humus sapiens ну? 09:48, 25 June 2006 (UTC)


Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism

Dear Humus sapiens! I have created Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism. Please put it on your watchlist, and please add relevant AfD's as you find them. Cheers. - CrazyRussian talk/email 19:56, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

FYI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR#User:HOTR_reported_by_User:Zeq_2

And if Humus were to act on your specious complaint he'd be in a conflict of interest. Homey 06:27, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Homey, this is paranoia. I Never wanted Humnus to act I wanted him to know what is going on. I informed him and another editor you reverted (the other editor is not an admin but that is irelevant) Zeq 06:45, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Hidden History

If you follow the link to the online book you'll see the following:

"Reposted here by permission"

Thus, no copyvio. Homey 22:13, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Hate speech?

Where is the hate speech? Give me a quotation. Homey 22:28, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Buthelezi

I don't think Buthelezi thought apartheid was apartheid so his views on Israel do not come as a surprise:) (Buthelezi was widely considered to be a collaborator with the apartheid era government). Homey 01:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Apartheid proposal

Thanks for asking - I'll certainly support this proposal as far as it relates to the South African pages. I would suggest rephrasing it so that it's purely a factual proposal, rather than expanding on your opinions on the very controversial issue of the Israeli Apartheid article. You can always add those comments below in the voting section, but if you keep them separate from the proposal itself, all sides would be able to support your overall proposal without being seen to endorse a particular view on that sub-issue. Zaian 10:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I've added my voice. I thought hard about this, and decided to abstain from the debate about the Israeli Apartheid article, but this shouldn't reflect on your proposal. Zaian 11:02, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Humus, thanks for asking. I'm putting some thoughts together this week and I hope to submit them on the weekend. It's a good thing Kim has given us two weeks to do deep thinking. Su-Laine Yeo 07:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Humus, thanks again for asking. I've put up a new proposal and I would appreciate your feedback too. I'm going to let it speak for itself now and get off your talk page before someone accuses me of being part of a religious faction ;) Su-Laine Yeo 23:17, 1 July 2006 (UTC)


NPOV

This is not NPOV:

""Israeli apartheid" is a highly controversial expression: its proponents use it to compare Israel's policy with respect to the Palestinians on the West Bank and, to a lesser extent, its own Arab citizens to apartheid-era South Africa; according to its opponents, it is misused to isolate and condemn Israel. [1] (See the criticism section below.)"

There is no point just saying that it's opponets say it is to condem israel after all if Israel is anapartheid state ity should be condemed. Zeq 04:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Gender apartheid

I think your proposal is generally good. I think, however, that Gender apartheid may be viable as a stand-alone article. As an experiment, I've copied and pasted gender apartheid material from Jay's article to the Gender apartheid article - I'd be interested in your thoughts. Homey 04:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Some category namings

Hi Humus : Please see:

Thank you. IZAK 05:26, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

better wording

Israeli apartheid is a term used by those who oppose israel's right to exist as the homeland of the Jewish people. The proponents of using this term claim that there is a analogy between Israel's policy toward Palestinians (inside Israel and in the Palestinian territories) and the apartheid regimen policy toward blacks while opponents of using the term point out that it is not accurate historically and that even critics of Israel's policies should not be using a term that is offensive and used as justification for attacks on Israel's right to exist with a goal of turnning Israel to a country rulled by Palestinians.

The accusation is often found on webs sites of all ranges of new anti-Semites – from neo-Nazis to extreme left.

See :

http://www.mideastweb.org/israel_apartheid.htm

http://www.zionism-israel.com/issues/Apartheid.html

http://www.zionism-israel.com/log/archives/00000117.html


see example:

The homosexual agenda (or the gay agenda) is a term used by those opposed to the LGBT rights movement, especially conservative Christians and other social conservatives in the United States, to describe what they see as the attempt to redefine marriage and family, and shift focus away from what they consider traditional morality. The term is considered offensive by many,[1], particularly those who see the goals of the movement to be equal rights. Often, those who would be offended by a serious reference to this term still use it satirically or sarcastically.[2][3] Zeq 09:05, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Have you thougfht about it ?

Do you have better wording ? have you read the articles I attached to the more NPOV lead ? Zeq 19:10, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue IV - June 2006

The June 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Kirill Lokshin 05:51, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

thanks

I was somewhat irritated that it seemed like nobody'd even bothered to read my complaint. I couldn't find the offending templates in {{Torah portion}}, not that I couldn't find what the problem was, I mean I couldn't actually find any evidence that the offending templates actually exist. That you narrowed it down to the ==Templates== section was immensely helpful, not only in finding the final culprit, but also in giving me the impetus to do so. Anyhoo, I just wanted to drop you a note saying "thanks". שבת שלום. Tomertalk 00:07, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Bantustan India reference

I think the section on India you inserted is actually referring to South Africa, the NP in South Africa, and the fact that the NP changed the terminology from Bantustan to Homeland. It certainly makes minimal sense to me in an Indian context, but perfect sense if it's about South Africa. I think the India reference just means that in South Africa, the -stan ending was used by analogy with the name of the newly-formed Pakistan. If so, the reference doesn't belong under the section about Bantustans outside South Africa... can you convince me your reference is actually about India? Zaian 21:46, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, I read that reference, but I'm still sure it is referring to South Africa (not to mention that the paper is about South Africa). The India partition reference simply implies that the South Africans mirrored the name Pakistan. There wouldn't have been apartheid apologists in India, and the anti-apartheid circles were in South Africa, and the NP that changed the name to Homelands is not the Indian National Congress but the South African NP. Zaian 07:18, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Vandalizing?

Excuse me, but how did I "vandalize" the David Duke article? I removed an irrelevant sentence, more accurately paraphrased Duke's statements in the Current Issues interview, and changed one of the sources from an Anti-Defamation League article, which is a very biased source, to a link to video footage of the interview itself. Construing my minor and accurate edits as "vandalism" and threatening to ban me from Wikipedia is nothing short of outrageous.

--Ryodox 04:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

If I may make a comment

Just an aside, I thought i'd note, Jesus being the Messiah to someone actually doesn't technically make them a Christian. It turns out that to Muslims, Jesus actually is the Messiah as well, but their definition doesn't entail Jesus being the actual son of God, atoning for anybody's sins, or really as far as I know much of anything that helped anyone at all. It's in the Messiah article, I don't plan to revert you or anything because I don't know much about the Jews for Jesus organization, but I just thought i'd point it out. Homestarmy 04:25, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I suppose, but still, I just thought you might want to know :) Homestarmy 17:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Welcome messages

Hi colleague, this is regarding [7]. We usually use {{anon}} to invite IP users to register. Also, it would be good to check their contributions first: do we really want to invite spammers and vandals? Cheers. ←Humus sapiens ну? 02:25, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Usually {{anon}} is used, yes, but I like to give a more informal, friendly welcome. The few edits I checked through looked on the surface looked fine to me (since adding the template the user seems to have made more vandal-like and spam-like edits), and a quick lookup suggested that the IP may be used by more than one person, and I assumed good faith: in my mind, an IP user should be treated no differently from a registered user- some of our more established members started on the rocky side of editing before converting from the "dark side"!
Surely a warm welcome is more of incentive to add constructively than a "stop it" message with little explanation? I do agree that some users on Wikipedia are malicious and will probably never add anything meaningful, but remaining civil doesn't cost anything, and without anyone to annoy, they may go tired of adding spam anyway (it's a long shot, but hey!).
I can see your point, but, as I said, I made efforts to check the user's edits (although I somehow missed their edits to Creampie) and IP address and believe all users deserve the same warm Wikipedia welcome, registered or not. I know your message was posted in good faith, and so was my welcome message, so we have something in common!
By the way, pretty off-topic, have you considered joining Esperanza? We're always looking for new members who are as active and as you seem to be, and it provides a nice break from editing if it all gets too stressful.
Regards,
EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME | IMPROVEME 12:55, 3 July 2006 (UTC)


I look forward to seeing you around Esperanza! Love your name and the explanation on your userpage, by the way! EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME | IMPROVEME 09:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

RfA Thank you

Thank you!

Thank you, Sentient Chick-pea Salad, for your support in my RfA. I appreciate your trust and support, and I will do my best to further help this great encyclopædia and community of ours. If there is anything that you feel I can do to help, please let me know. -- Avi 02:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

IP 82.26.29.46 sockpuppet?

Could you please check if 82.26.29.46 is actually Ulritz, who had the same Modus Operandi and was obsessed with the same section of Zionist political violence? Thanks,--LeflymanTalk 03:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

your opinion is NOT fact

Thanks for your comments on my edit. Clearly you are confused - you are not the sole arbitor of wehat is fact and what not no maytter how pompously or dogmatically you may say something. 82.26.28.24 22:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Israeli Apartheid arbitration

The move/revert war issue for Israeli Apartheid has been referred to arbitration. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Move and revert warring at Israeli Apartheid --John Nagle 00:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't me & Thankyou

Hi Humus sapiens it wasn't me that did disruptive edits, I only correct VW stuff and Car stuff.

BTW thanks for unlocking letting me adjust stuff. --VWphaetonfan 09:32, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Israeli apartheid

I suggest you actually read the complaint - you may want it to be about me but John Nagle's complaint is about the revert war over the name. And I'm sorry, your statement was not only a personal attack it was also contradictory and nonsensical. Homey 15:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

As far as I can see it the complaint is about *you* arbitrarily deciding to rename the article when there was no consensus to do it. Frankly, it's not very impressive that rather than take responsibility for your actions you're scapegoating me, a person who wasn't even involved in the revert war. Homey 15:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

SlimVirgin 3RR Report on BHouston:Response

(Copied from 3RR incident report)

It is important to note SlimVirgin's portrayal is simply inaccurate. The main problems with her portrayal are:
  1. In the edits she points to above, I clearly added information that the founder was "Dr. Andrew Marks, a Columbia University professor" -- accurate and sourced information which SlimVirgin blindly reverted 3 times. Jayjg eventually added it back himself after her third removal of that information.
  2. The organization did not mention in any way, in any literature, that the boycotts where examples of New Anti-Semitism, instead the group in question said they were anti-Semitic -- which is something different. SlimVirgin is pushing an OR linkage -- it is not a coincidence that SlimVirgin has dozens upon dozens of edits to the New Anti-Semitism article in the last few days -- it is her pet article.
  3. I also added information that the organization is a "American non-profit" -- to SlimVirgin this is another of my sins as she mentions above. But the organization is clearly registered as under the IRS code 501(c)3 as a non-profit -- it says so on its website. So my sin here is adding accurate information.
I stand behind my edits. To call me and my accurate edits disruptive while ignoring SlimVirgins blind reverts of true and sourced information is wrong. SlimVirgin has framed my edits in a negative light, a light that the facts do not support, because that is more effective getting action. Unfortunately, it seems that with Humus Sapiens, SlimVirgin found someone willing to unquestioning believe her. --Ben Houston 21:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

RfM

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Apartheid (disambiguation)]], and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.SlimVirgin (talk) 01:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Neurtrality

The article on the Palestinian exodus claims that Zionist violence was only in retaliation to Arab aggression. Just because it has a reference does not make it unbiased. I removed an obvious piece of propaganda. Please do not revert my editing, thank you.Smitty Mcgee 01:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:Jewish partisan activity in Eastern Europe eeu75180.jpg

Hi, I noticed you tagged this image as being from the Smithsonian Institute, however, the USHMM is not a part of the SI. Btw, good job starting Jewish partisans, you beat me to it... heqs 03:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Oiboy77 repeated violation

Hello humus, I figured I should let someone know that despite countless warnings, User:Oiboy77 continues to add unjustified tags on the Israel and the Palestine articles, his reasoning seems to be based on his rants about how zionism controls wikipedia, when I let him know that he broke the 3RR (two fold in fact) he responded with these strange notifications on my talk page: [8] [9].- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 07:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

  • "Unjustified tags"? That is not for you to decide, silverburg. "Rants about how zionism controls wikipedia"? Way to resort to slander when all else fails. Oiboy had a valid point, and it is sad to see the blocking of one so dedicated to keeping this encyclopedia neutral.Smitty Mcgee 07:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

In support of: Jewish partisans

Nice work on the new article! Just to update you: I've taken care of adding it to the list of articles in development in the Holocaust "quality attack" editing project currently in full swing on the Hebrew Wikipedia. Have also added its link in the appropriate category on the Partisan page. Now I'm going through and adding this article as See also: for each of the listed articles (e.g. Bielski partisans, Simcha Zorin), which is giving me a good opportunity to do some editing where needed, add references, etc. NB: This wasn't on my To-do list for today, but partisans didn't get to tweak their schedules according to their own preferences, so in their honor I'm making a special effort. -- Deborahjay 10:52, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Jewish ethnonym

It's been done already, apparently. Historically the "Zh" word was the East Slavic word for Jews (cf. "Yid", Polish "Zyd", etc.) with no negative connotations. It's only in the last century or so that it has become a slur. Anyway, of course you know that my intent was not to cause offense, but I thought it was useful from a historical point of view and by way of comparison to polish et al. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 22:46, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Israeli

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Israeli. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Israeli/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Israeli/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 13:30, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%86%D1%8B

Could you expand Caucasian Avars by translating above mentioned article? I would be very grateful.

Regards,

Luka Jačov 16:28, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

NWO

If you like that sort of thing, go to www.rense.com and www.prisonplanet.com as well. BOTH keep referring to the NWO. Psychiatry and psychology will, if not already, be a huge part of the NWO. Religious ? You'll be diagnosed with delusions of grandure, delusions of paranoia, delusions of persecution, obcessive compulsive disorder, so that those who are religious will be committed to nut houses. Concerned about the NWO, same there, all to remove all threats to the NWO. The USSR and other totolitarian regimes had, and some still do, lock up anyone opposing them into the mental hospitals. Now I know why the Church of Scientology and certain other religious sects oppose the mental health system. Martial Law 23:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

By the way, if you see a UFO, alien, other non-approved matter, the Robertson Panel states that you will be ridiculed, mainly by being declared mentally unfit, since shrinks are used in it, and that, certain other govt. protocol is still being followed. The Robertson Panel protocol was initiated by the CIA in 1952, immediately after Washington, D.C. was involved in a major UFO incident. Martial Law 23:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
You've indicated that you don't like the NWO, neither do I, so I went looking for any NWO deterrents. Found a good one. There are others, such as the Concentration Camps that will also be used. Another 9 - 11 attack, even alien contact, Martial Law will be declared, thus those camps will be opened and used. The Prison Planet website's archives should have more info. Also check out Jeff Rense's website. Martial Law 19:39, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Runglish

check out {{User Runglish}} hehe - CrazyRougeian talk/email 05:03, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


Need Help

hello, one time a few months back you told me that I should get a wikipedia account. You also said you would be glad to help out when I got an account. Now that I got the account, I need help on how to use all the wikipedia code, and I especially need to find out how to get all those userboxes on my userpage.Lan Di 16:24, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

never mind about the user boxes, I figured them out, however, I need help aligning the userboxes to the right like you have.Lan Di 16:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing my user page.Lan Di 20:30, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

DYK!

Updated DYK query On 11 July, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jewish partisans, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Mgm|(talk) 10:07, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Gibraltar

Hello Humus!

We would appreciate your outside opinion in the following RfC! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Gibnews

Thanks alot! --Burgas00 11:26, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Joseph Kennedy

I've added a section dealing with his virulent (even for the day) anti-Semitism. If you have any additional info, please feel free to add. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 17:57, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Some folks are trying to chip away at it, too... Why people rush to defend this monster is beyond my ken. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 19:33, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I've done about all I can on this. Rjensen continues to whitewash. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 20:42, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Sheynhertz-Unbayg

Hi Humus: Could you please take a look Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Sheynhertz-Unbayg. Editors of Hebrew and Yiddish pages have come across User:Sheynhertz-Unbayg's work over the years. I am giving him the benefit of the doubt in the current RfC. Your views would be appreciated as this appears to be a cultural miscommunication too. Thank you IZAK 04:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Bahai faith

Bahai is something that you edited and I was interested because the sit was locked down soon after and there it sits unable to me updated due to understandable reasons. I was interested in your thinking behind those edits. Out of interest here in New Zealand. RoddyYoung 10:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Johann Cornies

Hello! Dobroho ránku/Dobryj večir, oyder Gutn tog/nakht. I made Johann Cornies, Chortitza articles. Do you know him? Can you expand their? See also Livshits article. --Sheynhertzגעשׁ״ך 17:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

FYI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samir_Kuntar


Creature of Bad Habits

Hi Humus....asking you about this since you seem like an admin who might take an interest. Either this user has been hijacked or he's an insane racist vandal. Either way it might bear checking out. If there's a procedure I should follow, please let me know. Thanks! Schrodingers Mongoose 20:01, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Never mind...someone nailed him already. Cheers. Schrodingers Mongoose 20:03, 16 July 2006 (UTC0



Arbitration

You presence is requested at the Arbitration Re: Removal of humus sapiens admin privilages due to administrative abuse. Please click Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration Israel Article —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oiboy77 (talk • contribs)

Hi Humus Sapiens. I got a similar message from Oiboy on my Talk Page. It's not something I'm keen to get in the middle of, but I replied saying I would consider it if you didn't object. --Vjam 16:37, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Just so you are aware I have posted this arbitration after trying mediating with you on the Talk:Israel page several times you seem to not look at the facts and resort to calling any edit that is does not talk about Isreal in a positive light as anti-semetic or anti-Israeli, which is far from the truth. People Jeweish myself I find your deletion of articles and supression of information ludicris and subhuman. Editors take a lot of time to edit and add posts and just becuase you do not AGREE with them does not give you the right to delete them, and call them vandals.

[[10]]

--Oiboy77 23:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Oiboy77, if you are reading this, I think that you should withdraw this request to impeach Humus sapiens because I am pretty sure that the ArbCom will not even accept a hearing, let alone impeach Humus sapiens, and I think it may lead to you getting a reputation for causing disruption first. Secondly you may want to tell us what admin abuse that Humus sapiens has caused, because this is usually in the way of locking a page and then editing a page, and then banning opponents to gain an editing advantage. It seems as though Humus is simply acting as and editor and nothing more. Blnguyen | rant-line 01:24, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations on winning the arbitration case. Keep up the good work. Schrodingers Mongoose 04:43, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

FTR: [11]. ←Humus sapiens ну? 23:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Check this out

[12] Looks like an attempt to discredit you, I wonder who can it be... LOL! --TheYmode 05:42, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue V - July 2006

The July 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot.

Help Request

I am having some trouble trying to maintain neutrality at Talk:List of the UN resolutions concerning Israel and Palestine. As you can see I am trying to keep things reasonable but another editor is insistant on including highly prejudicial material from extremist sources. Any advice would be helpful. Cheers. Schrodingers Mongoose 19:58, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history Coordinator Elections!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 11!

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot - 18:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Misuse of VP

I have no idea how I misused it, I just downloaded it today and am learning the features, the only thing I could think I did was revert an article that was vandalized twice consecutively by the same person, therefore accidentally reverting back to a vandalized article. If you look back at Zionism you can see that I was attempting to revert a prior vandalism that was twice vandalized by the same user, I have a stellar record here on wikipedia and stand by my policy of zero tolerance for vandalism. I promise you that what I did was accidental, and not a misuse or worst of all vandalism. --Sopranosmob781 20:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

State of Palestine

Aw, I removed the quotes from "State of Israel" too, but you won the edit conflict.  :) 6SJ7 21:02, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

In between your subsequent edits, someone snuck the info box back in. I had removed it back on July 13 because Palestine is not a country (see my edit summary and all of the talk on the talk page.) However, this info box is quite smaller than the previous one. I can almost live with it, but probably not. What do you think? 6SJ7 19:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Barry White

Hey, I listed Barry White at vandalism for his username, and you said the correct place was WP:U. However, WP:U is a policy page, not a reporting page. The WP:U policy page says to report it at the vandalism page that I posted this at. Handface 04:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

dynamic theory of gravity

I'm not sure if you work on science articles, but can you please unlock dynamic theory of gravity article. An admin locked it unfairly refusing to explain why my additions weren't appropriate or discuss it for that matter. His only comment was "Protected Dynamic theory of gravity: Needs help against the teslaphiles". He's had a history of bias agains't the article, threatening to just scrape it down to one sentence. Please unlock it for the sake of fair contributions. 72.144.71.66 09:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


FYI: this anon left me a request to unlock the article. I've no clue why/how I was chosen and what's going on there. I hope the anon reads this because my suggestion is to use the article's Talk page. Follow dispute resolution process if that does not help. I know WMC as a responsible and reputable admin and trust him as a knowledgeable editor. I am not going to circumvent his protection without a good reason. Cheers. ←Humus sapiens ну? 10:15, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

The good reason happens to be your responsible and reputable admin refuses to have any way but his own the article. The history of the page should be evidence enough plus edits by another anon here: [13] Note not a single comment has been left about why my additions weren't suitable. Please reconsider the page unlock it was locked purely because the admin, for unexplained reasons refuses to admit new information into the article not because of any vandalism. 72.144.71.66 10:26, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

If you don't wish to unlock it, please point me in the direction of another admin - preferrably one who ISN'T invovled in the page editing. 72.144.71.66 10:45, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Try to resolve dispute. It is wrong to look for an admin in hope to sidestep another admin. ←Humus sapiens ну? 11:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Although I have no idea what the dispute is about and really only have an amatuerish understanding of the science, I do think I understand what is meant by "teslaphiles". Nikola Tesla is one of those guys whose work and legacy, although great and innovative, is often exagerated by people that tend to have less of an understanding of the subject than they might think. Anyways I guess that I am being overly pedantic, but maybe if you choose to get involved in the above dispute you could keep what I wrote in mind.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 08:27, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Jewish partisans

Hi, Just to note you I have put some extensive quotes from book about Polish-soviet partisan war in Nowogrodek region relating to Jewish partisans. Since until 1989 official version wass that Soviet partisans were heroes, I doubt there are any similar texts in the west, since only in last 15 years historians can write books about such controversial topics. Hope you will enjoy the reading. I will prepare the paragraphs reflecting the POV in the book later Szopen 10:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Targeting of civilian areas in the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict

Thought you might be interested in this non POV entitled Wikipedia article. --Dweller 11:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Arab league and Israeli/Arab conflict map

Please see my response to your comment on my user page here: User_talk:Brianski#Arab_League.2C_Djibouti_and_Somalia Brianski 05:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

And again Brianski 04:21, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I see you have of your own will nominated the image Image:Israel_and_Arab_states_map_k.png for deletion and got it deleted, replacing the various revisions with your own version exclusively. How on earth do you claim to be impartial and part of the Countering Systemic Bias teams? Brianski 04:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Israel and Arab states map k.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Israel and Arab states map k.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:06, 4 August 2006

Statement deleted from the Rebuttal in Hezbolla article

I edited the Hezbolla article yesterday and I received a warning message from you.

What I did, was exactly removing the following statement from the Rebuttal section "However, it expresses support and sympathy[9] for the activities of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, Islamist groups responsible for suicide attacks and armed resistance in Israel and the Palestinian territories." That statement doesn't relate to the Rebuttal section. It's very obvious that it was a rebuttal of the rebuttal by someone who didn't agree with the rebuttal. Even though he, who added this statement, may be correct, he shouldn't have added his statement to that particular section. In short, he's a fucking moron.

The problem is, I didn't know how to comment on my modifications to explain them but I'm glad that the community noticed the error and re-instated my modifications. I understand that you are trying to do your job and may have not noticed the error. May be you should've given me guidelines not warnings because not any deletion is vandalism. It doesn't make sense for someone to regularly donate to a cause and then vandalize it.

--msafi 02:17, 5 August 2006 (UTC)msafi311

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:KKK_holocaust_a_zionist_hoax.jpg

I'm wondering if this image is being used legally. It shows a KKK group that assembled on the front porch of 15 Springhurst Ave. (Toronto) sometime in 1981-83 (or thereabouts) in response to a march past what was then the KKK's HQ in Toronto. I believe this image may be the property of one of the Toronto newspapers. (I'll apologize now if I've somehow messed up formatting, etc. for this. This is the first time I've seen an image on Wikipedia and said to myself, "Hey! I was there!") Glmurray 07:53, 6 August 2006 (UTC)


Thanks for uploading Image:Peelmap-a.png. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ed g2s • talk 22:05, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

UN Resolutions Page and Mediation

I saw your response to my proposed mediation. FightCancer requested that a member of the Mediation Cabal intervene regarding the use of sources, as their seems to be some disagreement as to what is appropriate between him and other users. Yes, I am a new member to Wikipedia, though I do not think that prevents me from helping to resolve disputes. If, however, you are not comfortable with mediation by me, I can have the case opened for a new mediator. --LawrenceTrevallion 05:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, FightCancer believes the discussion should contiue. Again, if you would like an older mediator to take this case, I shall recuse myself. If you are content, then perhaps we all need to revist the talk page and try to sort this out. --LawrenceTrevallion 15:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I can give you a detailed summary of FightCancer's request, but if we are going to remove the Remarks section, it may be a moot point. I shall put something up on the talk page. --LawrenceTrevallion 22:27, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

One more note: while I admit to being a bit "green about the ears" on here, I have already mediated one dispute. (Granted, the fighting seems to have died down by the time I got there.) If you wish to check this as a reference, go to the Mel Gibson talk page and check under Mediation Cabal heading. --LawrenceTrevallion 22:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Why does he need to be categorized under Category:Anti-Semitism when he's already in Category:Holocaust denial? BhaiSaab talk 20:47, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think he's anti-Semitic, but okay. BhaiSaab talk 21:25, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Humus_sapiens/archive11&oldid=1165650307"