Wikipedia

User talk:IZAK/Archive 47

< User talk:IZAK
Latest comment: 9 years ago by IZAK in topic History of the Jews in Nepal

IZAK (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email)

Archive 40 ← Archive 45 Archive 46 Archive 47 Archive 48 Archive 49 Archive 50

CfD nomination of Category:Holy Land during Byzantine rule

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Category:Holy Land during Byzantine rule has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. GreyShark (dibra) 17:33, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:1917 in the Palestinian territories

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
 

Category:1917 in the Palestinian territories has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. GreyShark (dibra) 17:24, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Thank you for letting me know. I have responded [1]. IZAK (talk) 10:37, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVII, April 2014

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:00, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Collegiate discourse

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I'm not writing this a warning, just a hopefully friendly note at this point. Strong, policy-supported and reference-supported debate is of course welcome at CfD, like any discussion page.

As you've been around for awhile, I'll merely leave it to you to consider whether such comments as were on that page (not merely that discussion) were appropriate collegiate discourse.

As such, no need for a response.

I wish you well. - jc37 00:02, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Hi Jc37 and thank you for contacting me. Sound Logic and a thorough knowledge of Jewish history, as well as reliance on well-established WP:EXPERTISE is as important as citing WP policies in difficult topics, which I very frequently do cite, if you would review the many CFD and AFD discussions I have been involved with over many years. As you may know, not all usage of WP policies in AFDs and CFDs is okay because of the problem of WP:LAWYERING. So it is always a judgment call how to proceed in complex discussions. Thanks again and please feel free to share your personal POVs with me at any time, IZAK (talk) 05:44, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Question about arbitration

Latest comment: 10 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Hi, I wonder if you could advise me on which noticeboard to post a complaint and potentially block a user who persists in deleting sourced content and in edit warring, and who has a clear conflict of interest in editing a certain page? I am prepared to provide diffs, but I am unclear as to which dispute resolution process I should turn to. Thank you for your advice, Yoninah (talk) 22:45, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Hi Yoninah and thanks for contacting me. I am sorry you are having trouble because I know how intellectually honest and reliable you are. As I am not an admin I cannot properly advise you. I suggest you contact any one, or all, of the following very experienced and highly reliable admins that will hopefully offer you the direction you need: User Jfdwolff (talk · contribs), User DGG (talk · contribs), User Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs), User SlimVirgin (talk · contribs). Best wishes and keep me posted. Thanks again for contacting me, IZAK (talk) 05:44, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Yoninah It depends a lot on the nature of the misdemeanour. The most egregious open-and-shut cases can go through WP:ANI (the administrators' noticeboard, where particular incidents often attract a swift response). If the behaviour is more insidious and subtle, WP:RFC/U may be required. Arbitration is the very last resort, and cases will be rejected from WP:RFAr if no attempt has been made to resolve them through other channels. JFW | T@lk 06:15, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
To a first approximation, it doesn't matter where you ask for assistance. But you need to say what the specific problem is to get a meaningful response. But I see just now that you have done it very reasonably at AN/I with respect to the editing of Street Artists Program of San Francisco and gotten a very satisfactory response. DGG ( talk ) 01:45, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Reform vs. Progressive Judaism

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello, IZAK, sorry for bothering you. I'm trying to sort the mess in regards to the various denominations (and you have no idea how much confusion and edit warring it caused in wiki.he). My main concern is the Reform/Progressive articles. As I see it, "Progressive Judaism" is merely an umbrella term for those affiliated with the World Union for Progressive Judaism, both Reconstructionist and Reform, which are two different things. Reform Judaism - AKA progressive, liberal etc. in various countries, with all sorts of minor differences between them - is all which sprung from the teachings of Abraham Geiger, Samuel Holdheim and so on, or conforms to it. Therefore, I believe that "Progressive Judaism" should either be a redirect to Reform (or vice versa, doesn't matter as long as it's one article) or to the WUPJ, while "Reform Judaism" should start with something like "RJ, also known as liberal, progressive etc.", with sub-sections with all the little local denominations now on the Progressive Judaism article (except Reco., of course). That is what we have on wiki.he, more or less. Would you like to comment? (I know I should have posted it on WP:Judaism, but it's quite dormant and I've seen you have been involved in this. Sorry for dropping all this on you). מהמברטה (talk) 20:00, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, I just thought on a more concise way of communicating myself:) There should be no "Progressive Judaism" article, merely one about the WUPJ with all its affiliates, while all those corresponding with U.S. Reform Judaism (U.K. Liberal but not U.K. Reform, which is conservative) should be on "Reform Judaism".מהמברטה (talk) 20:06, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi מהמברטה and thanks for contacting me. You are not bothering me it is a pleasure to help you. By the way, it is always good to also post a message at WP:TALKJUDAISM and ask for any input over there. I am not surprised you are having this problem, we had it a long time ago as well on the English WP. But from what I can recall, Progressive Judaism is different to Reform Judaism even though they have common theologies and roots and you cannot "impose" your theories about their common origins to "make" them the same, because there is a huge difference of GEOGRAPHY involved: while in the United Kingdom (Britain, England) the movement is called Progressive Judaism and it has a different meaning over there, however in the United States (America) and Canada, it is called Reform Judaism. It is as simple as that and that is why on the English WP both of them remain as both of them are valid even though there is some duplication involved, but so what, there are so many streams of Orthodox Judaism it is accepted and no one tries to squish them all into "one denomination" because that would be absurd for many reasons. Please be in touch and best wishes for a Shabbat Shalom, IZAK (talk) 04:59, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Request

Latest comment: 10 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

My friend, who is a Wikipedia user, needs someone's help.

They and their edits have been personally attacked in talk discussions with inappropriate comments. When they brought it to the attention of administrators, they started to personally attack my friend rather than focus on the facts of the complaint.

They saw your name as a user in a Wikipedia administrator discussion and would very much like to get in contact with you since you have had long-time, valuable user experience with Wikipedia.

They need someone like yourself to provide some constructive assistance or feedback, and address the real Emet based on the facts. Chazak, Chazak, Vuh Nitchazek.

You can reach my friend at jrkrasner at gmail. It is best to use that contact since I have limited access to a computer. Wishing27 (talk) 18:38, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Hi Wishing27 and thank you for contacting me. It would have been much better if you could describe to me right here on this talk page what problem you are having and then we could all see what is happening. I will not contact your friend off-Wiki at this time until you can clarify what is wrong. The best place to complain or perhaps even ask for help is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (known as "AN/I"), if the admin/s there have rejected your request there is not much I can do as I am not an admin. For example, can you give the link to where the problem was addressed on the AN/I noticeboard? Thanks. Anyone is free to contact me via the Wikipedia Email feature, but I will not necessarily respond there either. The best thing is to start the conversation going right here and then we can take it from there. Best wishes, IZAK (talk) 03:10, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

It would be best to address this with my friend at the contact information that I provided you.

I cannot address it here since I do not know all of the details-

Original ANI request- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=606024240#Repeated_personal_attacks_and_reverting_of_edits_without_addressing_in_Talk_to_gain_consensus

Follow-up to the block: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wondering55#Blocked

The unblock request-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wondering55#Unblock_Request Wishing27 (talk) 20:27, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Hi again Wishing27. I am not familiar with the situations you are linking to. I am not an admin. It's best to contact an admin for advice because admins do carry much responsibility and they have their own experience with procedures for dealing with such matters. I would suggest that you contact admins such Users DGG (talk · contribs); Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) and SlimVirgin (talk · contribs) since they are knowledgeable and will give sound guidance. I cannot get involved. Thanks again, IZAK (talk) 04:51, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Category Masada

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please see Wikipedia_talk:Categorization#Masada. Debresser (talk) 10:41, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Thank you for informing me. I have responded. [2] IZAK (talk) 13:09, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVIII, May 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:51, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Incense

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Izak, could you look at Incense offering and Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Holy Incense, eqch seems to have some unique material, but I think the AfC draft is a little clearer. Should they be combined? If so, the cleanest way is to move the draft into mainspace under its existing title, and hen mark them for merging. DGG ( talk ) 00:32, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Jews and Communism

Latest comment: 9 years ago42 comments10 people in discussion
Main pages: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jews and Communism, Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 March 14, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jews and Communism (2nd nomination)

ANI

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --◅ PRODUCER (TALK) 21:49, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Kudos

Fending off anti-semitism must be exhausting, demoralizing work. I really appreciate your persistence.--Atlantictire (talk) 22:44, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Thank you for kind words! IZAK (talk) 21:45, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

April 2014 ANI/1

There is currently an ANI thread that may concern you [4]. Regards -- Director (talk) 20:12, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Direktor

Is after you - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=603211423 .--Lute88 (talk) 21:44, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

RfC

Potočnik

Hello IZAK, I saw your question at ANI. I will try to help, however, all I know is that Potočnik is a Slovenian surname. I googled a bit trying to see if in some South-Slavic language perhaps means something, but I didn´t found anything. It is possible that the root of the surname may be Potok which would be a small river, so Potočnik could be a person from the small river, but it is just a free interpretation of mine. I immediatelly remembered Herman Potočnik... In what context is found the Potočnik you are searching the meaning for? FkpCascais (talk) 13:59, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ Krohn, Rabbi Paysach J. (2007). Traveling With the Maggid: A journey to great Torah centers of yesteryear. Mesorah Publications Ltd. pp. 37–40. ISBN 978-1-4226-0229-4.
  2. ^ Singer, Evelyne. "The Lost Jewish World: A visit to contemporary Lithuania". Hamodia Magazine, 22 November 2012, pp. 10–14.

I was therefore wondering if there is any connection or similarity from the Polish surname Potocki. Thanks again, IZAK (talk) 22:22, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Ugh. All these words originate from the Slavic word "potok", meaning "stream" or "brook". "Potocnik" means simply "of the brook". Not only in Slovenian, but in Serbo-Croatian, Slovakian, Polish, and a whole bunch of other Slavic languages. There are surnames all over that originate from the term (including Serbia, Fkp), but the word need not refer to a surname at all. -- Director (talk) 09:35, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Oh IZAK, I only now noteced that Producer changed his name to Potocnik, I wasn´t aware of it at time I answered you here. Regards, FkpCascais (talk) 01:55, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the info everyone. IZAK (talk) 11:03, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Chag Pesach Sameach

 

Yom tov. USchick (talk) 17:27, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Thank you USchick and wishing you and yours a Happy Passover! IZAK (talk) 17:13, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

April 2014 ANI/2

Hello - just to let you know that I mentioned you in an AN/I discussion -[5].Smeat75 (talk) 17:57, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jews_and_Communism_(2nd_nomination)

  You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jews_and_Communism_(2nd_nomination). Thanks. MarkBernstein (talk) 21:32, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Thank you for informing me. I have responded. IZAK (talk) 13:07, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

  The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Awarded for your work relating to Jews and Communism Balaenoptera musculus (talk) 14:30, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
  • I am truly most honored Balaenoptera musculus. Your thoughtfulness is much appreciated. Thank you very much!! Kind regards, IZAK (talk) 05:05, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the barnstar

Sincere thanks for my barnstar and your touching message, it is much appreciated. All bestSmeat75 (talk) 23:55, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

  • My pleasure Smeat75, you definitely earned it! IZAK (talk) 10:49, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

A League Of Sensible Editors

I'm quite discouraged by the entire Jews and Communism episode, but I've been wondering whether an informal federation of several sane and sensible editors with an off-wiki presence might be useful for addressing eyesores -- especially those defended by one or two zealots. In fact, I'm surprised on doesn't exist. Or perhaps it does, and you know the secret handshake? MarkBernstein (talk) 23:06, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Please tell me you're joking! We just busted up one gang, and now you want to create another one? I'm all for collaborating, but it needs to be transparent. Maybe there's a portal we can join where we can post announcements whenever there's a problem? Portal:Contents/Portals and Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias USchick (talk) 00:29, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
I realize no one was talking to me, sorry for the interruption. :-)

USchick (talk) 00:32, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

I was going to try you next. uSchick. I still wonder don't see how gangs can be stopped without a counterweight. But I'm about to declare it a bad business and lost cause anyway.MarkBernstein (talk) 00:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for not getting mad at my outburst! :) Please don't be discouraged. You became involved just recently, Izak and I have been chipping away at this monster for a long time. We were ready to declare it a lost cause ourselves, but then you showed up and literally created a tipping point that sent the whole thing over the edge. As far as moving ahead, sunshine is the best disinfectant. There's no need to create a new undercover terrorist unit, all the tools we need are already out here in the open. Let's use them. USchick (talk) 01:00, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
I'd like to point out that once the tag team was exposed, it became less of a problem immediately. The fact that the gang leader faded away into oblivion on his own, tells me a whole lot. He didn't fade away out of strength. When you run across something like that, once you start shaking it, it falls apart pretty quickly under its own weight. It may take a while, but keep shaking it and it will fall apart, because there's nothing there holding it together. My 2 cents. USchick (talk) 01:06, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

I sort of agree with USchick. It’s really not fair that this should be our problem. There’s nothing more pathetic than getting mad about something on the internet, and on principle I try to stay away from sites that infuriate me. Unfortunately, right now Wikipedia is one of those sites.

The fact is there’s a subculture of people whose hobby is internet Antisemitism, and they crop up everywhere. Huffington Post, music message boards… anywhere on the net with idealistic (and, ironically, leftist) principles of tolerance and inclusion. I’m in favor of inconveniencing the Wikipedia powers that be (to the extent that such a thing exists—I really don’t know) with a WP:ARBCOM on how to deal with this because they owe it to everyone who doesn’t come here for the POV war of all against all.

I don’t want to be a Wikivigilante, but I sympathize with MarkBernstein because rule of law isn’t really isn’t working right now. I mean yeah, the article was deleted, but it’s not reasonable to expect people who IRL are sane and productive and would like to stay that way to keep coming back for three months of that. Fighting internet Antisemitism is not going to become my hobby.--Atlantictire (talk) 15:00, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

For people who think that ArbCom is a good idea, please read User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 163#Standard of conduct for arbitrators. You don't have to read the whole thing, it basically says, "Given the above discussion, and many similar discussions, it seems fair to conclude that there is some dissatisfaction with the overall current governance of en:Wikipedia." That's what involved arbitrators and administrators say about themselves. Don't forget that Wikipedia is a social experiment where There are no rules and There are no cops. I wish we had someone out there looking out for us, but we don't.
I never said that this is not my prolbem and I never said there's nothing to be done, I only said that whatever we do needs to be out in the open and not a covert operation. Look what I found: [6] Non discrimination policy. If we knew this existed, we could have used it early on. I suggest we all sign up at WikiProject Discrimination as Participants and in the Resources section we can list any useful policies and tools available for making a reasonable argument. It turns out, the reason Mark was successful in deleting the article is because of the way he framed the nomination. Well, who would know that? On Wikipedia, as in real life, there are lots of things you have to know if you want to accomplish anything. I believe being part of a group like WikiProject Discrimination will link us all to each other and to other people who can be called on to comment on a questionable situation. That doesn't mean we will all agree, and it doesn't mean people there will automatically agree either, but it's a resource we could have used if we knew about it. What do you think about this idea? I'm moving this discussion where everyone can comment to Proposal. Please comment there. We should probably get off Izak's talk page. He probably will want it back. :) USchick (talk) 17:50, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Dear MarkBernstein, USchick, Atlantictire: Hi everyone and thank you for your comments. I have been away for a few days on private business, so I have not had the time to see your important discussion here. This reminds me of that old story about two disputants who came to a rabbi to ask his opinion and for a ruling. He asked to see them one at a time. He heard the first one out and told him "you are right"! Then he heard the second one out and told him "you are right"! After they left, the rabbi's wife comes out and asks him how he could say to both of the disputing parties "you are right"? At which point the rabbi looks at his wife and says "you are also right"! And that is the moral of the story. You all have important things to say. But let me tell you what my true opinion is based on over eleven years on Wikipedia, and it is also based on a story about a rabbi. One day a disciple comes running over to the rabbi and asks him "how do I become a serious student"? At which point the rabbi gives him a sharp glance and says "young man, sit down and study"! The point being that discussions and talks about doing this and that produce nothing. The only thing that makes one into a true scholar is study! Same thing with Wikipedia, it is not a "perfect" vehicle, I can attest to that because, just as one example, it is does not even have an iota of what the Talmud and its commentaries contain in term of information and wisdom. There is a work called the Talmudic Encyclopedia that expert scholars have been working on for decades and it is still not finished and WP doesn't even have a fraction of that information up yet. So we have light years to go to being perfect. BUT, on the other hand, the only way to get there is to edit in good faith to the best of one's abilities. And of course every now and again there will be editing and content disputes and clashes of world views, even a clash between "good" and "evil" but at the end of the day the "winners" on WP will be those with the greatest commitment, knowledge of their chosen fields, editorial skills, and familiarity with WP policies, who are civil under pressure, with time and patience to devote, and not much else that will win the day and win the race. I oppose hasty "solutions" that will achieve nothing in the end. Time spent on "protests" would be better used in creating, improving and editing articles. Talk and discussions and appeals to ANI, admins and ArbCom is ultimately a waste because it takes away valuable time from writing and editing. These are just some thoughts. The Jewish Sabbath approaches, Shabbat Shalom to all and keep on going strong! Best wishes and much appreciated, IZAK (talk) 22:48, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Well said IZAK. I think this page needs some work.--Atlantictire (talk) 00:49, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIX, June 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:41, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:GazaBarrier.jpg

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
 

A tag has been placed on File:GazaBarrier.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:36, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Hi User Sfan00 IMG (talk · contribs) not sure why this message is on my talk page since the file page clearly says it is User Zero0000 (talk · contribs) who is the originator and creator of that image. Take care, IZAK (talk) 10:24, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

History of the Jews in Nepal

Latest comment: 9 years ago19 comments5 people in discussion
Main article: History of the Jews in Nepal

AfD, RfC, DRV, WP-JUDAISM

ANI 1

ANI 2

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 11:40, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Move of "Judaism in Nepal"

Main article: History of the Jews in Nepal

The RFC on the "History of Jews in Nepal" was closed as rename to "Judiasm in Nepal".
You arbitrarily moved the article back without challenging the close of the RFC, which is against policy.
I would suggest that you undue the move and challenge the RFC at WP:AN.
  Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to move pages to bad titles contrary to naming conventions or consensus, you may be blocked from editing. --Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 08:53, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

  • @Ubikwit: The majority of LEGITIMATE WP:CONSENSUS is on the side of History of the Jews in Nepal based on the 9 Keep votes (versus 6 Deletes) at the AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of the Jews in Nepal and the 14 Keep votes (versus the 8 Deletes) (I tried to count them as best I could) at the DRV Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 June 30. The RFC you refer to is OUT OF ORDER because it was started on 30 June 2014 and closed on 12 August 2014 during which time the official DRV was opened on the same day (by you) on 30 June 2014 and closed on 8 July 2014 that should have shut off the DRV or at least made it moot and irrelevant, but it got dragged out for over another month and half, not taking into account that it was put out of business by the DRV, and then just by dint of laziness and lack of attention or just ignorance on the part of the closer, the RFC was left open just long enough for just 5 votes to Support the RFC versus 2 Opposing since the majority of users would have seen the notice on 1 July 2014 Talk:History of the Jews in Nepal#DRV that the main debate was moved over to the DRV: "There is now an official WP:Deletion review, see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 June 30#History of the Jews in Nepal". Trickery and fraud does not create "consensus" and results that are illegitimate have no validity. So cut the bull, and make sure that you do not get blocked for supporting such illogical, irrational and illegal "decisions"! IZAK (talk) 09:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @Ubikwit: Have you checked Talk:History of the Jews in Nepal#History of the Jews in Nepal? OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 09:28, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Who are you warning is likely to be blocked for what? Who are you accusing of trickery and fraud? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:38, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
@Robert McClenon: Thanks for asking. User Ubikwit (talk · contribs) knows full-well that the HE opened a request for a DRV the SAME day the RFC was started, (see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 June 30). Ubikwit LOST his DRV gamble. I even posted a notice as such on the article's talk page right below the request for RFC (see Talk:History of the Jews in Nepal#DRV). It is now Ubikwit that escalates the discussion by threatening me and by citing a totally out of order RFC when he knows (or should know) that he is himself out of order! The formal DRV settled the matter of the naming of the article as "History of the Jews in Nepal" once and for all by an overwhelming majority. Yet the RFC lingered for more than a month after the DRV was closed. You should have been aware that the DRV had shut off the RFC debate, and I am assuming you simply were not aware of what was going on, that the RFC was old and had been settled by other means (i.e. the DRV), unlike Ubikwit who comes along and screams his head off as if the RFC is "holy writ" when in fact the DRV had already settled the matter. The net result, is that the decision to move based on the RFC alone is illegitimate and in practical effect amounts to a sleight of hand arrived at by smoke and mirrors. Regards, IZAK (talk) 20:28, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

ANB

  This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive265#Move War at History of the Jews in Nepal, and RFC review regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:13, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Updated: History of History of the Jews in Nepal

Discussion

Thanks for your contributions. I wanted to say that if you have any "emotional attachment to this topic", you should clear it. I don't see any rationale but don't let others make WP:POINT about your editing if you assume WP:AGF. Nothing will happen to you, but whenever there will be any dispute, these reports shall be referred. They shouldn't be taken lightly. Thanks OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:23, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for visiting my user talk page @OccultZone:, I welcome any sane and rational talk, I only wish that Users like Ubikwit (talk · contribs) would visit me here and try AGF talk first before doing anything rash that does not help them or WP. Even the admins at ANI have grown tired of Ubikwit's constant tiresome frivolous abuse of that forum rather than trying to arrive at WP:CONSENSUS with his fellow editors first and avoid bullying his opponents into a corner that reflects poorly on him, who do not share his POV, (in 11+ years I don't think I have ever gone there if things don't go my way, I usually back off at the end of the day) and after all that is the beauty of WP that editors from so many varied backgrounds can come together and work collaboratively to produce a world-class encyclopedia, the best the world has ever seen! As you can see from the archives on this talk page, I welcome and I am not averse to sensible discussion with anyone who wishes to engage me in same. I do monitor Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism since that is what it's there for, and from there I came across the current AfD that launched the ongoing discussions. As for "emotions" -- there is nothing against WP policy in having an interest and WP:EXPERTISE in any area one chooses to contribute (nothing to do with "emotions" and plenty do with knowledge and interest), in fact that is how WP has been built by volunteer editors contributing of their time, skills and expertise to help write articles, edit, improve, and expand WP about things they know something about and have an interest in, otherwise it makes no sense to do this "for free" as a labor of love and to enjoy doing so in the process. No doubt you agree. Please stay in touch with me. Thanks so much, IZAK (talk) 08:59, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for such a warm welcome. I had seen you around earlier, you used to object the page known as "Jews and Communism". It was not just you, but at least 5-10 other editors who have had clean block history. Producer was a good editor but failure to AGF lead him to TBan. Now there's a new issue, you see it has been stated on Wikipedia's policy that no one is capable of controlling mind of other user. It might be correct that if a person is expert on some subject, they are directly appreciated for that but indirectly criticized for being an "expert". All day long, we will see the same long debates and arguments but it is finally useless if there is no evidence of remorse. Volunteer Marek made a proposal[7] but didn't go as good as it could. But I still think that you will happen to find better solution. No doubt, you've been here longer than most of us. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:29, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you OccultZone. First of all, let's be quite clear PRODUCER had to retreat himself because it was discovered that he had copied the "Jews and Communism" article almost verbatim from a pro-Nazi site. It was that simple. He was caught red-handed and he knew it. I had nothing to do with what he did to himself! Other users were a lot more upset with him than I was, in fact I was trying to have a dialogue with him and with DIREKTOR but they did not like talking to me they just kept on doing what Ubikwit does, just "revert first and ask questions later" and leave no room for genuine communications and give and take! It had NOTHING to do with "AGF"!! Otherwise, you speak wisely and I agree with your sentiments in full. There is no need for good editors to opt out of WP. The problem is that editors often forget that on the "other side" of their computer monitor/screen sit real live human beings and not "robots" that respond to every command and "press of the buttons" as if they were "part" of their computers and then they get frustrated that they are not getting an "automatic" response as if or like they "owned" their own computers that do not "argue back", that is a core problem with the interface between technology and human beings and hence creates confusion about/with human "emotions" "thoughts". Sometimes what are really strong thoughts are misinterpreted as strong "feelings" and also the other way around, since one cannot "read" all that on a cold machine like a computer. So people get frustrated and do rash things. Take this phenomenon of running to ANI, it is so childish, I mean could you imagine in real life every time one gets frustrated with another person we have to deal with we call or run to the police or to one's boss or manager or the owner of the establishment? It makes no sense, NO! you first try, many times to solve your problems in a normal human way by talking and reaching out, or just moving on, and that is something that Ubikwit has not done with all his objections going incessantly to ANI instead in classical "the boy who cried wolf" style and then acts surprised that he loses credibility, so sometimes it becomes necessary to give such a user a minor "reality test" that he should STOP knocking his head against a brick wall because it will hurt him more than anyone else and that he cannot "shoot his way through" to get his way, that others can also act tough if need be, and I think that Ubikwit has seen that now that if he acts tough, then that can be reciprocated if he does not act like what is known as a "mentsch" in Yiddish. Hope you can stay in touch with me and share ideas how to reduce steam and lower the level of "inhumanity" between users, it really wastes a lot of time and makes no sense. I do not get involved in edit wars. It is only because I saw what was posted at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism that I became aware of the "Communism" AfD and the "Nepal" AfD issues since I am NOT interested in either Communism or Nepal per se, as my edit history will show I have far broader interests in many other subjects mainly relating to what is included in the huge categories of Category:Jews and Judaism, Category:Jews, Category:Judaism, Category:Jewish history which by the way I began exactly ten years ago [8] [9] [10] (as 2nd user) [11] when categories were introduced on WP, I think it's a great system of...categorization and of finding needles in haystacks. I have spent the bulk of the last five years or more I would say in mostly fixing WP categories and hardly on articles, because the categories need constant maintenance and I enjoy fixing them. Every now and again a controversy comes along, just happens to be that lately there were two in a row, but I did not choose them. I couldn't ignore them either. I decided to add the links to get to the various parts of the disputes on my talk page because it becomes hard to navigate all the arguments at different forums at a certain point. Be well, IZAK (talk) 12:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
It was pretty strange that you opposed Tban for Producer at first, but special move. Most of the people who have commented on the AfD of history of Jews in Nepal weren't involved, they just wanted to say that article is notable and it shouldn't be deleted. Maybe some people have tendency of giving more chances, but there is a limit. It is great that you have worked on categories, even though a few editors have frequently worked on them there is backlog of categories that require maintenance, Category:Underpopulated categories for a name. I like to undertake these maintenance tasks, there is always something to do! OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 12:29, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi OccultZone: You say "It was pretty strange that you opposed Tban for Producer at first, but special move" -- but I can assure you it was 100% genuine and consistent on my part, see my general philosophy about articles that I apply to fellow-editors as well, even if I do not agree with them (I am able to hold and accept in my head "a thing and its opposite" as it says somewhere in Shakespeare --but most people cannot perform this feat -- maybe that is one reason I have survived and flourished so long on WP, and I still enjoy it more than ever!), see User:IZAK#Meta:Inclusionism. But PRODUCER shot himself in the foot and he lost even me when the others did research online all on their own (I don't even know how they found the connection, but it was irrefutable, and PRODUCER had to run in shame for what he had done) and they found the incriminating link between his "Jews and Communism" post and the Nazi site. Finito la comedia. What could I do after that? Nothing! He just did himself in by making enough people angry. The same in this case, if Ubikwit will keep on aggravating enough people and wasting their time, they will find a way to get rid of him because time is precious and we are all under various pressures and the admins and good WP editors are in short supply and under a lot of pressure. That is why I do not like to waste my time on edit wars. If I decide to support an article that is under threat of an AfD I take HOURS of my time to research the topic online (no I cannot go to a huge library, I have to use Google like the rest of the human race nowadays) and then I have to sift through all the digital junk and flotsam and jetsam and ads to reach good articles and sources, and in the case of the History of the Jews in Nepal I have come up with many excellent WP:V & WP:RS (as has Pharos (talk · contribs)) so it should be an open and shut case, but hey this is an article that has the word "Jews" and "Israel" in it and as we know that sometimes leads to knee-jerk WP:IDONTLIKEIT reactions (purely emotional!!!) and we have to waste time unlike if this was another topic the case/s wouldn't drag on so long. I agree that when I first came across the article myself it was poorly written and had a certain Chabad-POV come through, but that was quickly fixed, put into greater historical context and good sources about other facets were added. I have to laugh when Nishidani tries to smear me or others with some kind of "Chabad outreach conspiracy" when (unlike him) I have fought the pro-Chabad editors single-handedly taking them so far as to ArbCom in 2010 (Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Chabad movement) and they were issued warnings, and they have not forgiven me yet (that is why you will hardly ever see pro-Chabad editors support me on anything -- but I don't care about them they can take care of themselves if they want and they do, they have flooded WP with lots of their junk articles too, but they have also learned how to fight to keep it, so I don't want to waste my time with them either), but who cares about them (i.e. the pro-Chabad) they are trying to mess up WP, but in the case of the Nepal article there is more to the story, it cannot be ignored that for the last number of decades, going back to the 1960s, now it's up to 20,000 young Israelis trek to Nepal to find meaning in Hinduism and Buddhism that they do NOT find in Judaism, it is a fascinating trend in Jewish history. They say that about half of the current world-wide Buddhists leadership is made up of Jews. Anyhow, the point is that it is more than just "Chabad hosting Passover events" or dumb "tourists climbing the Himalayas", the bigger very important picture is the mass migration of young Israeli Jews to Nepal in the tens of thousands that Chabad is merely trying to capitalize on, while the real importance of the historical phenomenon gets lost in the shuffle of trivia. That is just one reason it is important to keep the article, it is at the center of something very significant. Thanks again for your interest, IZAK (talk) 12:59, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
It is nice that you still enjoy WP, usually whenever I feel being done, I just move to other wikipedias and very soon I am back here. I agree that whenever you are interested in a topic and you see a lot of details that would embrace some hardcore fansite, you would feel embarrassed and become eager to improve. It is one of the aim of wikipedia to bring out the information that can be sourced to a WP:RS. Sometimes the information is so suppressed or off-mainstream that people reject it, but it can be easily dealt with. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 13:58, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Discussions at WP:TALKJUDAISM

Main page: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism § History of the Jews in X articles

Please do not remove part of my replies, like you did on WT:JUDAISM. Because you think it is a personal attack does not make it so. Please seek third-party advice on 1. if that is really a personal attack, 2. if you should be the one removing it.

For the record, if you agree to remove the parts that triggered my comment about your style of writing from your previous posts, then I will agree to remove that comment of mine. I think it is an important comment, because your style influences the way your arguments are perceived, and it is therefore part of my reply to those arguments and not a personal attack. Debresser (talk) 07:51, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

  • @Debresser: thank you for your very "creative" response. I write clearly and firmly and I try to be understood. If you do not understand my meaning or choose to misunderstand what I say then please ask for clarifications and I will try to oblige with clearer language. I do not wish to get into new squabbles with you to waste time. My point is very simple, please stick to making points about the issues at hand and not about each other in that discussion. Focus on content and substance that can have positive results and don't look for excuses to start red herring tangential distractions that have nothing to do with the price of tea in China. There are far more serious issues to deal with than arguing over articles that have had good titles in place for at least a decade or more years. Let's not try to "fix" what is not broken. By the way, it would have been great had you participated in the debate surrounding the History of the Jews in Nepal article, it's related AfD and DRV discussions, as it involved the work of Chabad in Nepal, and because at the outset the pro-Chabad POV almost sunk that article, a few of us got caught up in improving the article, spending hours and days to improve it and adding excellent sources and sections, and making it truly WP:NPOV and it now stands out as a very good article touching on some crucial issues. Thanks again, IZAK (talk) 10:52, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Agreed, let's not detract each other from the really important issues. I did notice the discussion about Jews and Judaism in Nepal, but I decided not to comment, as I expected the article would be improved and kept (as indeed happened). Debresser (talk) 01:05, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 7

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

History of the Jews in Affaltrach
added a link pointing to German
History of the Jews in Livorno
added a link pointing to Ladino

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

  • Fixed both. IZAK (talk) 13:49, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

question

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello, thank you for the renaming of my articles refering Jewish histories by city. Im trying to edit and change the name of another article I made named "Jews in Oldenburg" to "History of the Jews in Oldenburg" like you did to "history of the jews in ancona" and others, but im having trouble figuring out how its done. can you help me? thank you.

p.s. - not sure whether this is the place to write it down. sorry if im wrong.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ScottyNolan (talk • contribs) [12]

July 2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

  Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to History of the Jews in Kyrgyzstan may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • during the 20th century, large amounts of European Jews began to emigrate to [[Kyrgyzstan]] (which was then part of the [[Soviet Union]], and a small amount of them still live in the country.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

New article of your interest

Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Check Shabtai (given name), I just reviewed. It is directly related to Shabtai. Millions of hits online. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 01:58, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

  • @OccultZone: thanks for the post but I am not sure what you are trying to do or to tell me. Be well, IZAK (talk) 04:20, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
There are millions of hits about this subject, but both articles are too small. You may want to expand. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 04:23, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi OccultZone, the most famous one with that first name is Sabbatai Zevi, but generally I do not expand on articles about a name only, unless you have some other good reasons and can convince me, I am passing on this. Take care, IZAK (talk) 04:33, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 14

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited History of the Jews in Kyrgyzstan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Manas. 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) 08:52, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

tracking prods

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

In response to a comment you made, you can track prods with this category Category:BLP articles proposed for deletion by days left If this is disingenous or annoying, my apologies, I do not claim to be a sophisticated Wikipedian.Jacona (talk) 16:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

  • @JaconaFrere: thank you for contacting me. Your suggestion does not really help for a number of reasons: 1 Looking for prods in a single subject is like looking for a needle in a haystack since hundreds of article get nominated as prods. 2 Prods move very quickly, unlike an AfD which lasts at least a week, a prodded article can be wiped out at will within 24 hours unless an editor picks up on it very quickly. 3 I am always curious as to the mind-set of an editor than wants to prod things away. Why isn't there an interest or caring about another editor's work that may have taken time but is still unfinished? It is a puzzle. 4 As you know editors are not around 24/7 nor do they remain on WP forever. So often-times just leaving a message about an impending prod is just a useless spinning of the wheels formality and the article goes down the tubes without it standing a chance. 5 In the current situation there is the opportunity to post a prod in action at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism#Proposed deletion, as at many other WikiProjects Deletioin sorting noticeboards, but it was not done in this case in spite of at least 8 synagogues being targeted as prods. 6 The best option, which was also not done in this situation, is if an editor comes across articles that from his personal POV he feels need improvement or are not good enough for WP for whatever reasons, then start a dialogue and discussion or a RfC someplace or seek out some expert advice from editors working in this field at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism or a similar WikiProject in order to create WP:CONSENSUS and make sure not to poison the well nor to engender controversy by moving ahead with mass deletions without proper discussions first or even trying to get help to save the articles. This is true in all fields, not just here. Thanks and please stay in touch, IZAK (talk) 05:06, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Editing advice

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Izak! I've appreciated your comments at AfD about the spate of deletes of synagogues. Can you help me out by taking a look at Benton Academy and see if you think I am handling this correctly?Jacona (talk) 20:08, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

  • @JaconaFrere: I took a quick look at the editing history at the article you mention. So far it seems like a case of "much ado about nothing" but you seem to be right about opposing the style and methods of User Bentonac (talk · contribs) who is functioning as a single purpose account [15] violating WP:NOTADVERT. If you feel this is getting out of hand you can and should seek broader community input at a related WikiProject or if the problem persists, try reaching out to the user on their talk page or the article's talk page, and if that fails, seek input from an experienced admin as to whether it should become an ANI complaint. Take care, IZAK (talk) 09:17, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! Jacona (talk) 11:36, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:IZAK/Archive_47&oldid=1143056785"