User talk:Humus sapiens/archive6

Martin Luther and Antisemitism

The material as we had it yesterday was tampered with by an anonymous editor. I have readded the Paul Johnson quote and citation. This troublesome editor has also taken all of the Martin Luther and Anitsemitism article and created a rival page Martin Luther and Anti-Judaism. That anonymous editor has done that without consulting anyone on the Talk:Martin Luther. Look at the Martin Luther article now. I have tried to get it back to the way we agreed. Also delete Martin Luther and Anti-Judaism if you can. As you know we have come to the conclusion that it is inaccurate. I have alerted Jayjg to these problems. Shalom, Dave drboisclair 16:45, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Soviet Union

Hi, thanks for joining WPSU, please feel free to put up tasks, projects and goals. :) - FrancisTyers 23:44, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Crazy changes by Gilgamesh

Unfortunately, User:Gilgamesh is now imposing his own views by changing the transliterated Hebrew names of articles with redirects to unreadable Hebrew names and fonts, as if his criteria are the only ones to reckon with, when there are in fact several. My computer, as I am sure many others' as well, does not pick up his type of fonts, and thus he is messing up articles such as Safed, Hadera, Holon, Afula, Arad, Israel and many others defacing them and making them unreadable on the web. He is going to DESTROY the normal usage of Wikipedia's Hebrew transliterations to satisfy his own needs without there being any consensus. Common usages are being thrown out in favor of obscure and pedantic academic usages familiar to only a handful of unkown academics. He should be called upon to stop BEFORE he rushes to do further damage without any consensus being reached. All his changes should therefore be reverted. See all his recent contributions via: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Gilgamesh I thank you for your interest, and urge all readers here to act. IZAK 03:25, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Conspiracy theory redux

"This is the song that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends..." See [1]. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:55, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Shalom!

I am Ahia, from the hebrew wiki. you uploaded this photo:Image:First aliyah BILU in kuffiyeh.jpg you wrote that the people in the photo are Billuim. I have a serious book that say the people are workers from the second Allia, in Migdal Moshava. What was your source? אחיה פ. 81.218.229.167 18:44, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Shalom Ahia. I saw this common picture in many books. I think I scanned the image from David Bamberger, A Young Person's History of Israel, 1985. I don't feel possessive about it, please amend he title as you see fit. ←Humus sapiens ←ну? 00:18, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciation for work done on Martin Luther page!

My dear Humus,

Thank you for the wonderful work you have done on the Luther page. It exemplifies, IMHO, the best that Wikipedia has to offer. Shalom leca drboisclair 17:57, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Neofascism and religion

Hello Humus: Are you aware of this abomination: Neofascism and religion#Judaism? What's your opinion? I have tried to add some "rational info" for whatever it's worth. Take a look. Maybe the whole article should be nominated for deletion? IZAK 11:42, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How to handle vandalism

There's WP:AIV which you might find useful at times... --HappyCamper 01:59, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Question?

I just received this message:

User talk:24.8.135.234 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Jump to: navigation, search

Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.

Vandalism is a sure way to get banned. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 00:48, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

This is the discussion page for an anonymous user who has not created an account yet or is not signed in. We therefore have to use his or her numerical IP address to identify him or her. Such an IP address can be shared by several users. If you are an anonymous user and feel that irrelevant comments have been directed at you, please create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other anonymous users. We also recommend creating an account if you do not want anyone to see your IP address. "

However, I don't know where it comes from. The only thing I've edited lately is an article in "Christianity," and except where I tried putting an ID tag to a section about Astarte (where Hebrew meaning of the word is clarified) and, of course, learned that wikipedia doesn't use tags like normal html (how do I refer to a SECTION anyways?) and so fixed the mistake (put it back exactly), I don't know why I received this message. Now, I am on my neighbor's internet connection because we share a wireless point with him (my wireless modem, his connection, and we split the costs--it's a good deal) so unless he did it (which I doubt, he's just an nice old guy that likes to check e-mail and google now and then. It's just a litte disturbing. It could be that it's a dynamic IP too or something. I'd just like to know what it is that was vandalized so I can check if I did anything (which, again, I don't think I did). I just created a new account (I don't remember the old one and haven't edited under an account now for a few years) which is "infinitelink" so hopefully you can contact me through that. Thanks for your time.

Answered at User talk:24.8.135.234. ←Humus sapiens ←ну? 08:58, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: Well then, I'm not sure what's going on because I didn't remove anything from "Astarte." I'm still confused. Anyways, thanks. I hopefully shouldn't have this problem once I'm back at university since that's a different IP altogether (still changing, but a long distance from here).

List of political epithets

I wonder if you wouldn't mind taking a look at this; an anonymous editor is insisting on adding the term "Anti-Semite", thus claiming that is a political epithet, rather than a description of someone who hates Jews. Jayjg ^(talk) 17:58, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My appreciation for your tireless concern

I think that you are really concerned about making Wikipedia a quality source of information to people throughout the world. Your work on the Luther article has been outstanding. I know that you realize the importance of courtesy in dealing with these matters. I think you realize that even though someone may have "secondary sources" on their side--if this does not square up with "primary sources"--the person is out of gas. I am glad that you take the time to be concerned. With kind appreciation, David Boisclair. drboisclair 19:39, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Israelis

Dear Humus: Great job on improving the template! It's a delight on the eyes! Sincerely, IZAK 10:04, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please see response on Luther discussion page

Humus, please see the response I made to your latest post. I believe that there is a valid point about relevancy here. You make a good point about the word pogrom. drboisclair 14:38, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CTSWyneken is suggesting that we all do research for a week and come back to the composition of the summary. I did not change the summary, but I corrected spelling. I don't think that you will be happy with the summary as it now stands, so perhaps we could just delete it for the week that CTS is suggesting and work on it, leaving just the caption and the link. I appreciate your scholarship and input. David Boisclair. drboisclair 16:01, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Update: CTS has reverted the Summary to the way it was. He has also done some research on MacColluch. drboisclair 16:27, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ma'alot

Hi Humus: See the mess about the Ma'alot article [2] Can you correct it? Thanks. IZAK 10:05, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cities with significant Arab Israeli populations

Hi Humus: Please see the Vote for Deletion (vfd) for Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 December 4#Category:Cities with significant Arab Israeli populations. Thank you. IZAK 12:00, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish history stub

Hi Humus: Please see, and cast your vote at [3] concerning Category:Jewish history-related stubs. Thanks. IZAK 10:31, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You are so uninformed it's pathetic

Dear whoever you are.

I am responding to the following message that you left following my last update regarding the Jewish Defense League. You said: "Please stop deliberately introducing incorrect information into articles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 22:54, 6 December 2005 (UTC)"

You had better do your homework because all the information that I have posted is true and correct. It is you who are mistaken and I challenge you to show me where the JDL is on ANY Government terrorist list. I would also challenge you to do some real research by examining the JDL web site <www.jdl.org.il>, and our blog <http://jdldotorg.blogspot.com/> before you run off at the mouth.

The JDL is alive and well and the diversity of our membership would probably shock you, perhaps the person you sit next to in shul is a JDL member. Yes, doctors, lawyers, journalists, members of federal and state law enforcement, rabbis, members of the military, teachers and professors, as well as average hard working citizens make up our members. Our leadership is not comprised of thugs, on the contrary, many are active and retired law enforcement or professional individuals, and all are respected members of their communities.

Before you accuse someone you don't know of "vandalism" for editing out malicious and incorrect information, you should endeavor to get your facts straight. I will continue to correct your misstatements about the JDL and our membership. I have put reviewing the JDL page in Wikipedia on the top of my list of things to do each morning.

If you would care to discuss this one on one, please send me an email <maccabee@charter.net>, and I will be happy to send you my telephone number or I will call you, whichever you prefer. I will be surprised if you agree to a dialogue because you strike me as being: A Democrat, a bleeding heart left-wing liberal, you are anti-war and you don’t support our troops and their mission in Iraq or Afghanistan, you probably go to a Reform Synagogue if you go to shul at all, you would never be caught wearing a kippah in public, you cringe at the thought of a Jew carrying a firearm to protect himself, you would ban the NRA if you could, you support Sharon's giveaway of the Gaza and West Bank settlements, would never consider making Aliyah, would certainly never go into the streets with an Israeli flag to counter a pro-palestinian demonstration, and are a card carrying member of the ADL. How close am I?

Kol tuv,

Velvel

answered [4] at User talk:Benmoshe. ←Humus sapiens ←ну? 04:41, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

israel and the UN

"UN Fails to Condemn Netanya Suicide Bombing" - I'm not sure this link should be there. It's a single link about a single incident from a pro-israel lobbying site. Unl;ess we describe it as such it changes the just POV balance of the piece. Does it really further understanding on the topic? Unbehagen 21:46, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"I used that particular link (rather than Kuwaiti, for example) simply because it demonstrates Israeli opinion." Indeed it does illustrate Isreali opinion - it reflects their Point Of View very well - now isn't that what we're trying to avoid doing unless we label it as such? Unbehagen 22:03, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I dont understand your last comment. I'm sorry I really dont. You say that the piece illustrates Israeli Opinion - I aggree it does. But this isn't really objective is it? If you're going to include a link like this then we'll have to add a section on how the US uses its membership of the security council to enforce a condemnation of the Palestinians in every UN resolution on the middle east - discuss the reasons for this unequivical support and put the piece in context. Do you want to do this or shall I? Unbehagen 22:19, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Shalom from RI

Shalom, bonjour, and hello. I was wondering, how did you get the "Instead of doing something really useful" clock on your webpage? It looks cool!

Au revoir, DanCBJMS -Daniel Blanchette 00:39, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

Thanks for your help on Riots in Palestine of 1929. If you can help in copy edit my English is not that great. Zeq 12:59, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mormon view of the House of Joseph

Hi Humus: There is more mish-mash at Mormon view of the House of Joseph. If you can, take a look. IZAK 18:54, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support on my RfA

File:Tigerlilythumbnail.jpg

Hey Humus sapiens! Thanks for your support on my RfA. The final outcome was (57/4/3), so I am now an administrator. If you need help, have a question, or just want to chat (or if I get out of line!), please don't hesitate to let me know! Again, thanks! :D

Tom e r ^talk

Rejection of Tanakh

Hi Humus: Please see and vote at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 December 12#Category:Hebrew Bible where it is beeing suggested that the word "Tanakh" is "not neutral", and I am trying to explain to them that it is in keeping with NPOV to convey the way Judaism uses certain terms to describe the Hebrew Bible/Tanakh. Thanks. IZAK 15:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

discussion

I have stated my case on Talk:The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion#Qualifications please respond accordingly with your edit objections in mind. thanks 69.248.237.88 04:22, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You should respond to issues on the talk page of the article rather than mine, that where the discussion is if you are able to control yourself. 69.248.237.88 05:36, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

First one you've given, and first one I have received. Thanks! Jkelly 07:26, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for not getting to your references

Humus, I apologize for not getting to your reference. Although you and I seem to be coming together and are able to work together, the "discussion" with Doright and Nuh-Huh has abosorbed much of my time. Now Jayg blew away the work you and I did on the Martin Luther and the Jews without a word of discussion. I have taken a deep breath and edited his new entry, and cited both sides of the scholarly conversation. I think the prose is very flat, but balanced. I'd appreciate it if you would look in on it and see if you agree.

I've also deleted two references to illegal versions of On the Jews... Both DRBoisclair and I have spoken to the publisher, who insists that they have never given permission to post this work on the internet. I believe them, since they have consistently denied permission to me to put their works on the net. This last in not negotiable for me.

Well, can you think of how you and I can talk these folks into doing like we've come to -- work together? --CTSWyneken 02:13, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Radhanite

I put this article up for featured status. Your input would be most welcome. --Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 22:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion and vote page are here Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Radhanite Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 13:38, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikistalking

Wikistalking is against policy. Please comply with the rules we all try to abide by. Or I will call in an admin. Unbehagen 23:04, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Judaism

Would you take a look at this page, and give me your honest opinion on what you think of it? I'm trying to resist weighing in on it. Thanks! --CTSWyneken 16:07, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have done some revision, and would also appreciate your input as to my revision. drboisclair 16:49, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Julia117 17:43, 16 December 2005 (UTC)julia117

Definitely, the subjects you mention are of great interest to me. I hope to add articles about every executed/arrested member of JAC and later to to work on the Doctors Affair.

Itzik Feffer

There's been a rash of edits to this article lately, and I'm a bit concerned about their possibly being somewhat POV (or at any rate, giving opinions using weasel words). You might be interested in having a look at them; I hesitate to, since I don't know enough about the subject matter. Palmiro | Talk 18:34, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish-Arab conflict

My browser seems to have mangled the Hebrew link when I edited this page. I wonder would you be able to fix it (sorry!). Also, I would appeal to you to reconsider your vote on its AfD entry ;) Palmiro | Talk 17:59, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright Edit War on Martin Luther and the Jews

Do you think I've made my case? I'm in something of an edit war over it with Doright. --CTSWyneken 02:14, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Hello! I ☆ed on you head page! Are you Jewish Ukrainan? see also ja:ウクライナ人の一覧? --Sheynhertz _געשׁ״ך 11:59, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:RachelBrown

Hi. I don't know the level of your involvement, but I noted that you wrote on Rachel Brown's talk page "you got an ally", and as such I thought that you might be interested in what happened today.

Rachel Brown, as you may know, left Wikipedia on 3 December 2005, citing that she was depressed because of edit wars and constant reversions of articles, particularly with regards to the Jewish-related articles. This led to a bucketload of RfArs, RfCs and an RfM filed by RachelBrown against Lulu of the Lotus Eaters and SlimVirgin for their part in proceedings. User:Poetlister then added her part to the mediation, and, after Lulu refused to participate, she asked me for advice about taking it further, towards an RfC or an RfAr in relation to the dispute and the actions of these two administrators.

1 hour after I received the request from Poetlister, and just after I finished sending my e-mail reply, User:Poetlister was blocked indefinitely, as a suspected sock puppet of RachelBrown (although RachelBrown does not seem to be blocked). No evidence has been produced that this was anything more than a unilateral decision made by an administrator, and indeed there is substantial evidence that they are not the same person, and could not be the same person, and indeed even if they were there is no evidence that their actions could constitute a bannable offence, and even if they did, there was no ArbCom decision and process was not followed.

Phew. Anyway, thought I'd let you know about that. If you want to get yourself involved, I am sure that you can follow the links to see what has happened. Bye. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 14:41, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

New Article on On the Jews and their Lies

Would you take a look at this article? It is very over the top and really adds nothing to what we have already and will have in the Martin Luther and the Jews article. It has the looks of a fork that was developed to link to the possibly infringing versions of the work on the 'net. I've removed those links and got a -- hostle reply. I'm not going to fuel the abuse by replying to the user directly. I'm also not up to the venom I'll get if I try to adjust it to give new information about the work, to take out the exaggerated claims, attacks on scholars, etc. Thanks for your work, by the way. I think we're coming close to a good intro and summary. --CTSWyneken 11:31, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hebrew Alphabet

I have rewritten the articles on all the Hebrew letters here and before I replace the pages, your input would be appreciated. Thanks! Sputnikcccp 16:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Land of Israel

If you have time, could you comment on my suggestion here ?--Sjsilverman 17:19, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-semitic people

Hi there! I wrote on this issue in Batterfield's Talk page. I am not supporter of Ahmadinejad and his remarks. But I think I understand his ideas as I lived with them. I am sure if somebody ask his ideas on Jewish people, his answer would not indicate that he is antisemitic. He is against the existaence of Israel as a state. If this indicates antisemitism then we should add the names of all Heads of those states who does not recognize Israel. Thanks User:MITSO

Thanks for your reply. I agree with your example about anti Iranian. But I don't see any difference between those who does not recognize Israel and those who wish for its disapearance! either all should be considered antisemitic or none of them. Denial of holocaust is not a big issue. Because Iranian will not learn about this event and history of Europe in their schools. I will not be surprised if tomorrow I hear that Head of the state of a european country denies something that is considered like a fact in my country. They are not familiar with the history of Iran just like Iranians are not familiar with western history!. The majority of europeans even do not know that Iranians are not arab let alone knowing a subtle historical fact!. User:MITSO

OK! I agree. Let's keep it as it is. About Holocaust, It is definitely a big event for Jewish and Germans. Just like sep 11 is a big event in US history. Mass murdering happened several times in my country as well. Many times the whole population of a province were killed. But when you want to read about Iran, these things are considered subtle events, unless you want to become a specialist! Every body sees the world from his side. To me the whole history of Israel and Palestine, Brazil, Morocco ... are a subtle thing when I am looking at the world history. The same is probably true when you look at Persian history from your side. Any way, let's consider Ahmadinejad as anti-Jewish and wait for future. I wish no Iranian were in that list. Thanks anyway. User:MITSO

Tanakh / Torah / Old Testament

Hello Humus: Please see my discussions with User:Fischersc at User talk:IZAK#Tanakh / Torah / Old Testament, your input would be appreciated. Thank you. IZAK 04:42, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Humus, for reacting so quickly on Kingdom of Israel. Actually I could have done this myself, but I was tied up elsewhere. Cheers, Str1977 09:41, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Periodical Jewish Affairs

The following citation appears on the On the Jews and Their Lies page: Jewish Affairs 39, 1 (Jan 1984) 19-23. I'm having difficulty locating it in a library. I hope to get a copy of the article for verification sake. Do you have an idea where I might get a copy? --CTSWyneken 19:29, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking. Actually, it is to verify a quotation from it that Doright has put in the On the Jews and Their Lies article. He is trying to use it to support the statement that the work is "one of the most anti-semitic works ever written." The strange thing is I can't find the journal in a very large database of library holdings. And I'm known here for being able to find anything! 8-) So, as is my usual habit, I'm trying to lay my hands on it. --CTSWyneken 04:09, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Chosen

Hello! I ask you. How to say "Chosen people" on Hebrew language? (see Jews as a chosen people)

--Sheynhertz _געשׁ״ך 01:08, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Activism vs. encyclopedism

Hi CC, please accept my comment here and at Categories for deletion/Log/2005 December 29#Category:Anti-Semitic people in a good faith. I think you misunderstand what anti-semitism is. It is not a slur. Instead of deletionist activism, I think it would be better for the project if you get familiar with the issues first. I believe we can come up with encyclopedic criteria and an NPOV title. We should bring scholarly authoritative opinions, discuss and strive for consensus. That out of the way, cheers and Happy 2006! ←Humus sapiens ←ну? 23:46, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is a slur. Anti-Semitic by dictionary definiton is: One who discriminates against or who is hostile toward or prejudiced against Jews. [5] hence one declaring random people Anti-Semitic and putting them in the same category as hitler you cant quite think of NPOV. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 01:09, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I said "encyclopedic criteria and an NPOV title". Who said "random"? Please, do some reading. ←Humus sapiens ←ну? 01:21, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thats just it. You cannot declare anyone Anti-Semitic at random. What is the borderline that makes a person Anti-Semitic? We cannot establish that hence we either have to declare random people Anti-Semitic or we will not declare anyone Anti-Semitic. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 01:29, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Surely we can establish encyclopedic criteria. This is not the first time we deal with controversies. All you need is knowledge, good faith and open mind, instead of repeating "random random". ←Humus sapiens ←ну? 03:31, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Psikhushka

Hi, just wondering why you added a non-existant category, are you planning to create it? If so could you leave a note on the WPSU page - Thanks :) - FrancisTyers 14:47, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

new noticeboard

I've created Wikipedia:Islam and Judaism controversies noticeboard, I thought you might be interested. --Victim of signature fascism 19:33, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

shtetls

Hello! Can you make the shtetl articles like Shidlivtsi, Oles'k, Dobromyl', Vyzhnytsia, Bohushi, Mezhyrich (Sumy Oblast), Mezhyrich (Dnipropetrovsk Oblast) (Mezhyrich), Skulyn, Stolyn, Shpykiv, Skole, Zolote Pole, and put Category:shtetls?

And can you put original place names on the List of Hasidic dynasties like Szatmár, Pápa, Bobowa, Ovruch, Berdychiv, Zhytomyr?

Polish User:Halibutt(He has Jewish aunt) made Dubno.

--Sheynhertz _געשׁ״ך 08:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

also

We must make english version of uk:Категорія:Райони України, but what as name we make? Is there any portal pages about Ukraine? (confused english) --Sheynhertz _געשׁ״ך 23:19, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are so uninformed it's pathetic

Sorry, I just thought I'd repeat that for the laugh. I always find these overheated personal attacks rather amusing. Feel free to change the section heading if you don't agree.

You may recall the deletion argument over "Jewish-Arab conflict" and your suggestion that the article needed to be improved rather than deleted. Toya has now proposed reinserting the information from the late and little-lamented article at Talk:Islam and Judaism, but seems to have been put off by my somewhat stern response. You might be interested in following up on the matter and if necessary getting the information in question into shape for inclusion. Palmiro | Talk 02:27, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lutheran apologists

Dear Humus,

One thing that I would like to say about your comment on the Talk:Martin Luther page is that we as Luther scholars do not want to give an "apology" for what Luther wrote as "Von den Juden" and "Vom Schem Hamphoras." The old meaning for apology, as you know, is defense. These writings are indefensible. I guess trying to explain all of the attendant circumstances about them is giving an apology for them. Lutherans rather need to apologize for ever even considering making a defense of those shameful thnings. I am ashamed that ever such a scholarly person would ever stoop so low. With kindest regards to you drboisclair 16:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for the encouragement. I am glad there are more people involved with the Luther articles. I am for balance no whitewash: overall fairness. I think that we all can do it. drboisclair 17:38, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your comment

So what you're saying is the name "Yom Kippur War" is analogous to the name "Tet Offensive?" I appreciate the analogy. Now I'm going to play devil's advocate: please read in the respectful spirit intended. It would have been more persuasive if you had presented that as an analogy rather than by the statement you chose, which sounds distinctly more POV. I could imagine a Muslim counterclaim that to conduct a war during Ramadan places special hardship on devout soldiers who must fast between sunrise and sunset while they fight for their lives. I'm open to persuasion. So far I don't see any problem with "Arab-Israeli War of 1973." It's descriptive and it's neutral. Durova 23:58, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To give the background behind the analogy, Tet is a major holiday in Southeast Asia. In January 1968 the Viet Cong orchestrated uprisings in every major South Vietnamese city on the morning of their own cultural holiday. Militarily their effort was a disaster: the United States put down the uprisings within hours. Politically their effort was a resounding success. The fact that such a well coordinated uprising could emerge without warning has been called the turning point in American public opinion: mainstream leaders such as news anchor Walter Cronkite began to doubt that South Vietnam would ever stabilize enough to survive without U.S. military presence.

I've contributed a good deal to Wikipedia's coverage of the Hundred Years' War and I don't see your analogy. Despite the name's inexactness it's politically neutral.

Now to be critical, your characterization of the other side as ungentlemanly does sound distinctly POV. You may have a very valid opinion worthy of respect. You know more about Israeli military history than I know. It's the POV slant to your comments that makes me think - I want to be fair here - maybe the Muslims have a point. Durova 01:21, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Hi,

Can you look on my Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Alex Bakharev. We have worked together on a number of articles and I wonder if I really such a staunch Russian nationalist as the Oppose voters claim. abakharev 04:46, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to express my thanks to all the good people who spent their valuable time time and effort working on my (failed) RfA voting. Especially for those who actually voted to support me :). Lets move on and make together our Wikipedia an even greater place abakharev 10:03, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Groniot and Tashlum Dagesh

I've just seen and old edit you made, and wanted to let you in on a little secret. :)
In Hebrew, the glottal consonants, and the radical consonants belong to a category called "Groniot"(derived from garon - throat). It is one of five groups of places of articulation in Hebrew. Now all of these letters(א,ה,ח,ע) and ר cause a certain effect with the Dagesh Khazaq(gemination marker essentially), since they can't recieve it. What happens is that the vowel that comes be the Gronit changes.

א and ר cause this basically always
ה and ע cause this in Binyan Pu'al(פועל) but not in Pi'el(פיעל) and Hitpa'el(התפעל).
ח doesn't cause this effect at all.

Back to מסורבים. The base form is סורב of Binyan פועל. The ר changes the U to O, and we get sorav, instead of surrav. Another example: טוהר(purified) should be tuhhar, but the ה turns it into tohar. Just FYI. :)