User talk:Shrike/Archives/2012/April

1978 South Lebanon conflict

Can you explain how you arrived at this article ? The reason I ask is that you recently gave some advice to an editor which said "Could you please explain how did you came to this article?Becouse I see that you never edit it before.Following other users edits to propose opposing POV in areas that you don't edit together could be considered WP:HOUND". So, there may be a contradiction between how you see the actions of other users and how you see your own actions. This can be confusing for others. If you did arrive at this article because you checked my edit history and decided to edit it, that's fine, and I have no problem with anyone going through my edits, checking what I am doing, or starting to work on articles that I have edited (that article needs a lot of work). Nor do I have any interest in the reasons editors may wish to look at my contributions and act upon what they see there. But I do think it's important for everyone in the topic area to be open and honest at all times. So if you did arrive at that article because you checked my edits, don't be shy about saying so, I won't mind, but you might want to reconsider what you say to other editors if you think they are doing something similar. I see you removed what you regard as an unreliable source (I haven't looked at that particular source but Chomsky usually cites his sources so it's possible that the material could be restored using the sources he cites). There seem to be many articles in the topic area that use sources that don't qualify as RS. One non-RS that is used quite extensively is the Zionism & Israel Information Center (see here). So if you are looking for something to do, cleaning those up would be helpful. Someone needs to do it at some point. Sean.hoyland - talk 07:09, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

The answer is simple I use this link [1] to watch all recent edits on Israel topic moreover my edit didn't challenge your edits in anyway contrary to other user conduct in my opinion, moreover the article that I pointed is not part of the I/P conflict so you comparison is incorrect--Shrike (talk) 07:21, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

About the RS issue that what I noticed you more then welcome to remove non-RS.This article missing a lot of information for example all the background section including the Black September events.--Shrike (talk) 07:26, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

That tool has a 14 day replication lag from the MySQL server so how did you use it to identify recent edits that took place less than 14 days ago ? Did you post the wrong link ? Sean.hoyland - talk 07:49, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I am pretty sure that I saw this article in some list anyhow even if we had WP:IBAN my edits wouldn't violated it.--Shrike (talk) 08:25, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Okay, well, it doesn't really matter where you saw the edits, but you are being quite defensive when you don't need to be. There's no conflict between us. Also for interest, I will never ask for an IBAN against any editor no matter what they do or say to me. The key points I was trying to get across is that it's important that you feel able to interact with me in a completely open and honest way and that editors judge their own actions using the same criteria that they use to judge others (although I accept that you do not see the situations as analogous). If you ask me a question I will always give you an honest answer even if I know you won't like it. So, however you saw the edits, I'm telling you that you are free to look at my edits and take any action you feel is appropriate based on whatever you see there. It's fine. I try to operate here in a completely open and honest way and editing using my real name is part of that. If you see me make an edit that you think is biased or wrong in some sense, you shouldn't feel that you can't fix it because it might look like you are following my edits. And if you want to ask me about anything I've done, just ask, you'll always get an honest answer. Sean.hoyland - talk 11:02, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Shrike/Archives/2012. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 01:22, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Why...

...are you getting involved here. When a checkuser is directly involved, it's a bad idea for your 2 cents to get in there (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:55, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

If check user was really performed and it was confirmed that he is sock then I would not open my mouth.I feel there are some injustice here.Also the blocked admin ignored my query by mail--Shrike (talk) 17:58, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

The way you jumped into the fray, I'd be ignoring you too. It's really none of your business. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:28, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok this is your right of course but my right is to speak my mind if it of course not against any Wikipedia policy and I don't think I have broken any policy with my edit.If I do please point it to me and I will strike my edit.--Shrike (talk) 18:36, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, do we have one called WP:COMMONSENSE? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:36, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes we do have but I don't think that I am in a violation of it(btw its in essay not a policy).Also I want to point that comments of other users in WP:SPI are allowed.Anyhow I think the best thing is that we agree to disagree.--Shrike (talk) 18:48, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Your reply shows just how much you missed the point. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:55, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok--Shrike (talk) 19:00, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

What ?

Explain this edit. Sean.hoyland - talk 10:27, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

It was mistake probably pressed the rollback link by accident.--Shrike (talk) 10:42, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok. Sean.hoyland - talk 10:46, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Your HighBeam account is ready!

Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:

• Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
  • Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
  • If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
• The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
• If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 21:02, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Feedback please!

Hi Shrike!

Could you please let me know what in particular you deemed my 'commentary' or 'personal analysis'? It would be really helpful for me in the future to ensure that I stick to Wiki rules and also footnote properly (re. your comment on Baruch Marzel's page). Thanks so much!

Leika80 (talk) 12:23, 15 April 2012 (UTC)Leika80. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leika80 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Inclusion of pre-Zionist massacres in Palestine, History of Palestine, and Palestinian people articles

Can you please take a look at the == 1517, 1660, and 1834 pogroms/massacres in Hebron, Safed, and Tiberias == disputes on the talk pages of Palestine, History of Palestine, and Palestinian people please?

DionysosElysees (talk) 20:30, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I have it on my watchlist as I have edit it before--Shrike (talk) 12:43, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I didn't mean it like that. Several editors Malik Shabaaz, Zero, and OnceaWhile (or their names are something like that). Patrol those articles making sure that there is no mention at all of any of the aforementioned massacres. They clearly have a pro-Muslim/pro-"Palestinian" agenda.

DionysosElysees (talk) 11:30, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I understand you feeling but please take it easy edit Wikipedia according to rules and you WP:POV will be heard.Also I suggest you read the links in my welcome message.--Shrike (talk) 15:58, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm NOT even going to bother there is a clear and obvious propaganda campaign by the aforementioned editors to cover up these historical massacres that can be consolidated as a genocide of the Old Yishuv shame on those editors and shame on you for your support/complicity. If those massacres should not be mentioned in the "Palestinian" article then the Holocaust should be removed from the German people artice. DionysosElysees (talk) 13:24, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

User:AnkhMorpork has offered you some first-class advice on you talk page you better take it.Or you might get WP:BLOCK.--Shrike (talk) 17:39, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 15

Hi. When you recently edited Gaza War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ISM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:20, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Shrike. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 16:09, 15 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I have put back the paragraph on the NSW Board of Deputies in the article on Greater Israel See the talk page.Trahelliven (talk) 23:24, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Menchem Begin

You appear to be engaging in an editing war. Please desist, or you may end up being blocked. When your standing improves, you may act in a more summary way, but, until then, please remember the WP rules. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 15:35, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Reply

There is reply here: [2] --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:42, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment

Please comment at User talk:Malik Shabazz#Your request for clarification about WP:AC/DS. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 19:02, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Revertin

I noticed no single-rvert on that article. My understanding is that there is a three-revert rule on articles unless otherwise indicated, and there is a single-revert restriction on many Isra-Pal articles for obvious reasons—but not on that particular article. I don't care about having Israhell's hasbara line on there so long as I am permitted to have my dissenting view from Gideon Levy expressed as well. By all means put in a right-wing journalists view for balance against Levy if you wish. Best etc.
~ Iloveandrea (talk) 20:01, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

OK, I did not know that. I shall therefore revert.
~ Iloveandrea (talk) 20:08, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Dershowitz–Finkelstein affair

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The discussion is in regards to a guideline query and is not a request for any enforcement or sanctions.

Lighten up!

Oh, you Israelis! So touchy! I balanced my criticism of Regev with praise for Menaged. Can't say fairer than that. Have a word with your people though, tell them I want to see Menaged, not Regev. Best etc.
~ Iloveandrea (talk) 19:43, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

FYI

You may be interested to know that User:AnAimlessRoad is the subject of an Arbitration Enforcement case here[3].—Zujine|talk 21:23, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Yeah WP:AE on my watchlist.I think they should be brought to WP:AN/I as the diffs are pretty damning.--Shrike (talk) 21:26, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

You might be more familiar with the protocol than me. If you think that AN/I is more appropriate, would you considering bringing it there? Thanks —Zujine|talk 18:24, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

ODNB article

Hi Shrike, just a note to say thanks again for the article, and for being so quick to make it available. Best, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 19:55, 27 April 2012 (UTC)