User talk:Palmiro/archive

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

Hello Palmiro/archive and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

Good luck!

Official Sinn Féin[edit]

I created Official Sinn Féin because it was a dead link, and tried to include as much information as I could glean from online research. I am not an expert on the subject, so I'm not planning any more effort into it and am not watching it. If you have more knowledge on the subject (such as, for example, being Irish, or just knowing a lot about the IRA) feel free to contribute on it as you see fit.

But please do sign your talk page comments with a ~~~~. :)

- KeithTyler 17:51, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)

Luke Kelly[edit]

Howdy, and welcome to the Wikipedia. The little conflict with Luke Kelly is quite alright - I watch new/changed pages and do corrections like wikifications as I see [ages come up. Don't worry about it; I can also roll them back from the history. Good luck in the future! Whosyourjudas 01:02, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hi. Did some work here, too. Filiocht 10:07, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

DL[edit]

Hi, Left some comments at Wikipedia:Irish wikipedians' notice board. Welcome aboard!. Filiocht 09:21, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hi again. I did some edits on Proinsias De Rossa you might want to look at. Always link dates and propper nouns and do so the first time they appear, and not a second time. Also, headings are goot to add organisation and a table of contents. The article is really well written, just really linking to make it more 'wiki friendly'. Filiocht 09:37, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hi, Yes, there is a risk of over-linking, but I think that with Kelly and Brendan Behan as ex-students, I think O'Connell's deserves an entry. As a teenager, I saw Skid Row featuring Phil Lynott play there at the Saturday night dance. Filiocht 07:40, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Naji al-Ali[edit]

Good work! - Mustafaa 22:59, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah - and thanks for doing Birzeit also - you beat me to it! I'll see if I can add more later on (as I am very well acquainted with the University) but you did a nice job! Ramallite (talk) 00:21, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Syrian Telecommunication Establishment sharedip[edit]

Hi, Palmiro. Please review sharedip talk page, any assistance would be appreciated. Thanks. El_C 21:44, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the prompt response, I replied to it here. Best, El_C 05:04, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Official IRA and Welsh nationalists[edit]

See [1], [2], [3], [4].

Lapsed Pacifist 21:53, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Irish Republican Army article[edit]

Conversely, you unitlaterally added material relating to post 1922 when the consensus was that there is a very real break at that point and that the later organisations that claimed the name ought not to be given legitimacy by association. Your material is in the history, so it is not lost. But I accept that I ought to have at least moved it and will do so now. --Red King 12:02, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've answered this on your talk page. Regards, Palmiro 12:35, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There is no consensus on breaking NPOV. NPOV is a requirement. The organisation which post 1922 called itself the IRA has its own article and should be written about there. You unilaterally chose to add in stuff that was outside the timeframe of the Irish Republican Army article to that article. I simply moved it to its own article, where it can be explored in more depth, and linked both articles. It is a historic fact that the later IRAs' usage of the name is disputed by historians, researchers, commentators, the Irish people and on Wikipedia, while no such dispute exists for the original IRA. Therefore they should, under NPOV rules, be separated. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 20:36, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded to this in detail on your talk page, but I think in fairness to myself I should make it clear here that when I added the material on the post-1922 Irish Republican Army to the Irish Republican Army page no specific page for that material existed, and I did so after the issue had been raised several times, the arguments for including that material had not been refuted (in my view and the view of the majority of other contributors at least), and there was no agreement as to where else they might go.Palmiro 20:54, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The change reflects professional historical editing and the template follows standard Wikipedia struture. Your only problem with it is that it does not represent your POV. Your POV is neither representative of Irish opinior for that matter was the text you added in even factually correct either. Please concentrate on getting facts right rather than trying to ensure your personal opinion is written as fact, when it is disproved by sources from Dorothy Macardle to Tim Pat Coogan and does not represent the views of the majority of the Irish people. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 21:04, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I regard these comments as unacceptable and a completely unfair personal attack. I am not trying to write any point of view into any article, and it also seems to me that you have conceived an idea of my point of view which is far from accurate. You are the one who is insisting on your point of view dominating. I know there was at least one factual error in the material I added (the date Saor Eire was founded - but a saint can make mistakes with dates: your template is not free of problems with dates either, cf Official IRA), and I fixed it afterwards. I specifically pointed out on the talk page that I was writing it in far from ideal circumstances so as to rectify a major gap in the article, and I asked for it to be checked. You didn't make any corrections to it. If you see an error now I suggest that you fix it rather than using it as an excuse for a personal attack.

As for the majority of Irish people, I'm optimistic enough to think that they can face the facts about their history.Palmiro 21:17, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As a side-issue, I'd be quite interested to hear what you think my POV is. I also note that your editing to date on the new post-1922 IRA article doesn't seem to have changed any of my alleged errors of fact. Palmiro 21:39, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not talking about errors of fact. The problem is errors of presentation. For example, in the piece you wrote on the IRA after 1922 you mentioned that "government repression increased". An NPOV encyclopædia can't say it like that. "Repression" carries with it a judgment on their actions. Their actions may have been wrong, but under NPOV we can't imply it by using a word like repression. ("repression" is a term that is used to describe how Pinochet, Stalin, Mugabe, etc deal with their opponents. It carries a presumption of unfairness, of authoritarian bullying, etc.) The less POV term to use is supression. "Supression" can be either right and wrong. (For example, it is perfectly legitimate to "supress rascism". But to "repress rascism" carries with it in many people's ears a suggestion that something it being prevented unfairly.)

Using words like "repress" made the article sound as though it was written from a pro-IRA slant attacking de Valera. It may be completely wrong, but that is the impression a reader would get from an innocent careless use of language.

That is why I am so strong on the issue of the IRAs. I am not saying that each of the IRAs is not the successor of each other. I am not saying they are. But attaching them to the one article, rather than connecting them via links, gives the impression that Wikipedia is saying that they are one and the same. That is why Redking and I are so insistent on not putting them together. Put together you create a presumption in the reader's eyes of a link. The problem is that the original IRA owed its legitimacy to a decision of a parliament was under the official control of a government, all elected by the people. So they had a democratic legitimacy. Later IRAs were not. So to tie them together would be seen by the majority of Irish people, who in every poll ever taken have shown (by up to 94% in one poll) that they do not accept them as legitimate and do not accept them as the successor of the Old IRA, as pro-IRA bias by Wikipedia. That is something we have to avoid under NPOV rules. The way to do this is to keep each IRA separate, don't imply by layout a continuation, but through a template allow a reader to read all the articles. You leave the reader with the message: you decide. We aren't telling you what to think. All we are saying is the people of Ireland say there is no link. The PIRA/CIRA/OIRA/RIRA says there is. We are not commenting. You make your judgment. That is what NPOV is all about. It about not being biased, and not appearing to be biased.

Look at it this way: in straight political terms Fine Gael would argue that there is no link whatsoever between the IRA post 1922 and the earlier IRA. Fianna Fáil would say there is a link between the Anti-Treaty IRA and the Old IRA, but that is where it stops. Sinn Féin would say there is a link between the Old IRA, Anti-Treaty IRA and the Provisional IRA. Others would say the link goes down to the CIRA and no further, or the Official IRA and no further, or the Real IRA and no further. But Ian Paisley would say there is a link between all IRAs, ancient and modern. So you have to be careful not to be seen to be taking the Fianna Fáil, or Fine Gael, or Sinn Féin, or Republican Sinn Féin, or 32 County Sovereignty Movement, or the Ian Paisley side of the argument. Keeping each article separate, linking them, and pointing out that "most people think the original IRA is the real one. Others don't" keeps out of the minefield of appearing to be siding with one side against the other. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 22:51, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Somehow, I understood this as referring precisely to errors of fact: "...for that matter was the text you added in even factually correct either. Please concentrate on getting facts right rather than trying to ensure your personal opinion is written as fact..."
Your point about not taking anyone's side, and that lots of people have radically different views about the IRA, is one I entirely agree with, but it leads me to the conclusion that we should point out the historical facts in the articles involved, not try to bludgeon people into accepting any particular interpretation of one organisation or another as "legitimate". I continue to believe that "legitimate" is a dangerous word to use in this context: the original IRA initially was founded on the basis of, and regarded its legitimacy as deriving from, the Proclamation of the Republic of 1916: in other words, a Republic that existed only as a concept. This is the same sort of legitimacy that later IRAs claimed. The original IRA was only "legitimated" by a parliamentary decision later.
As for links between the different IRAs, it is undeniable that there were links between them and that there was organisational continuity between them. These are historical facts. They don't mean that the different IRAs were all equally justified (or unjustified) in what they did, and I don't believe that they were. I'm sure most wikipedia readers will be able to work that out if the facts are presented - I don't think you need to be so afraid that admitting the connections between the different IRAs will lead people to false conclusions. Palmiro 17:26, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

new vfd[edit]

The prior VFD that you voted at ended with no consensus, a new VFD has been opened at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Historical persecution by Muslims. ~~~~ 18:57, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Irish Republicanism[edit]

I agree completely with your comment on this article. It is ill-conceived, bloated, rambling and duplicates material elswhere without good reason. I've spent a silly amount of time sub-editing it, when really it should have been spiked on day one. If I could think of a suitable target, I'd just turn it into a REDIRECT. But "Republican movement" already redirects here and the topic does deserve an article. But this one is a disaster area. If you can think of a way to hack huge chunks out of it (including my corrections), I'll support you. Scrap and start again would be good - people can Seemain for the details. I just don't have the will to work on it any more. I'm not cut out to be a teacher! --Red King 19:10, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree. "Sent" was a poor choice of words.
Thoor Ballylee - I see someone (you?) resolved it. --Red King 21:30, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good work[edit]

Good work on the page dealing with the IRA from 1922 to 1969. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 21:09, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dublin[edit]

I assume that you are referring to "revert in memory of George William Russell" - --ClemMcGann 21:26, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gunther Schuetz[edit]

Irish_Republican_Army_(1922-1969)#The_IRA_during_World_War_II
Hi, I presume that you are referring to Gunther Schuetz. He parachuted in March 1941 and was almost immediately arrested. He gave his name as Hans Marschner. The IRA helped him to escape from Mountjoy February 28 1942. He stayed in the home of Mrs Caitlin Brugha. Sean McCool (Belfast) recommended that he be sent back to Germany with a shopping list. The fishing boat was captained by Charlie McGuinness. It was to leave from Bray. They were all arrested on April 30 1942. The meeting on April 20 was a meeting of the Army Executive at which they elected a new Army Council. They passed a resolution “That as a prelude to any co-operation between Oglaigh na h-Eireann and the German Government, the German Government explicitly declare its intention of recognizing the Provisional Government of the Irish Republic as the Government of Ireland in all post-war negotiations affecting Ireland”. They also resolved “to give military information to powers at war with England, which would not endanger civilian lives, even before any definite contacts have been established with these powers”. Remember that this was in 1942. America had not entered the war. There was every reason to consider a German victory probable.--ClemMcGann 01:46, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The saga continues[edit]

Thanks for feedback. I'll look in more detail at the '22-'69 article, but on the face of it, I have some humble pie to eat. I blame Michael Collins (movie) for my false memory syndrome! I'm still not willing to accept mere reuse of a name is value-free. --Red King 19:20, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Third Home Rule Act[edit]

Dj's edit was wrong. Once a bill receives the Royal Assent it is de jure enacted, ie, becomes an Act. Not every enactment gets put into practice but once the Royal Assent is given, it is 100% an Act. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 18:35, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Country called Palestine?[edit]

Sorry you are wrong. 1) It was not an independent country but a mandate granted by the League of Nations, carved out of the Ottoman Empire. 2) It was set up with explicit goal to establish Jewish national homeland 3) As if that is not enough, it was the Jews who were called the Palestinians at the time, so presenting it as a proof of Palestinian Arab identity or exclusively Arab entity is misleading. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 10:54, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Let me understand the argument you are trying to make: the Palestinian Arab identity is based on the British Mandate of Palestine. Correct? ←Humus sapiens←ну? 18:24, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. I thought we were talking about Israeli-Palestinian history denial#The existence of Palestinian as a people. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 20:07, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This is a perfect example how not to take a quote out of the context. Did anyone deny that the British Mandate ever existed? ←Humus sapiens←ну? 22:58, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]


IRA[edit]

Would you know when exactly the Irish Volunteers became the IRA?

Lapsed Pacifist 06:31, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bethlehem[edit]

Hey Palmiro, thanks for helping remove the extremist, minority POV off this article. If the editor does break the 3RR, please report him for it so he will be blocked for 24 hours.Heraclius 04:47, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Palestinian Arabic[edit]

You removed my "odd comment", but never addressed it. The sentence does not make sense, and until it's reworded so that it makes sense in English, either the sentence itself should be commented out (which I'm going to go do now), or the comment should remain. If you know what it's supposed to mean, great. Fix it so that it says what it's supposed to mean, and THEN uncomment it. Tomer TALK 18:59, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

No, that part I understand just fine. What I don't understand is how the "example" is relevant, which is what I've commented out. Tomer TALK 19:05, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
Hmmm... Kind of, I think. :-p Palestinian Arabic forms the infinitive for hamzated verbs with bo- rather than 'ā-? Why bo- tho? Where does the b- come from?! (admittedly, I don't know Arabic, but then again, neither do a lot of other people who may end up reading it...) Tomer TALK 19:10, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
OK. That makes sense, but that's what the article needs to say.  :-) Tomer TALK 19:12, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
OK. Thanks for the quick lesson. Have fun with your friends. When you get back, look at what I've done with the sentence and see if it passes muster. :-) Also, I'd like to know what vowels (IPA vowel symbols, not Arabic letters :-p) are used in the Palestinian Arabic pronunciation of Nāblus, so the IPA pronunciation can be put into that article, instead of the rather non-descript "naahblus" or whatever it says there now... Tomer TALK 19:23, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

ugh. I'm ruined. Now that I know what it means, I can't think of a better way to say it. At least I understand it now anyways.  :-p Tomer TALK 20:43, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

OK. I changed it to the unicode/IPA ʃ ... it's easier to just type ALT+0154 to get š for me, which is, obviously, what I did, but your call was better... it might be necessary to redo it a bit to make it look stylistically prettier (there are too many parentheses in there for what I consider aesthetically pleasing), but at least the correct character is in there now. As for the araq...I recommend copious amounts of water.  :-) Tomer TALK 10:09, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
BTW, while one of the devil's minions might have made araq, God made anise have a horrifically repulsive smell to keep people from ingesting it. In the future maybe that smell will remind you "DEVIL SEED LIES HEREIN!" and you'll drink something more flavorless like...hmmm... raspberry-flavored vodka.  :-d Tomer TALK 10:48, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
What's جماتين ? from the look of it, "jematin"? Tomer TALK 19:11, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
Duas sentenças.  :-p Tomer TALK 05:45, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
BTW, if you're looking for Unicode or IPA characters in the future, just do what I do...go to those articles and cut and paste them. :-) (smiley) (It helps to encapsulate them in either {{unicode}} or {{IPA}} as {{Unicode|<character>}} or {{IPA|<character>}}.) Tomer TALK 07:07, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia UK/Wikimania 2006[edit]

Hi, this is a circular to Wikipedians in Ireland to draw your attention to Wikimedia UK, where the establishment of a local Wikimedia chapter for the United Kingdom (and possibly for the Republic of Ireland) is being discussed. See the talk page, as well as the mailing list; a meetup will take place to discuss matters in London in September, for anyone who can get there. On another topic, plans are being drawn up for a UK bid for Wikimania 2006, which would be conveniently close to Ireland. On the other hand, Dublin's bid was one of the final three last year - might we bid again? --Kwekubo 04:21, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

مين خجلان، أنا؟؟[edit]

You are right about "Palestine" but I think you would also agree that there will be, umm.. مشاكل مع المتطرفين if we don't tread this carefully. I don't have as much time as I would like on Wikipedia most days, but I'll certainly try to write something within the next couple of weeks and let you know so you can give me input, but like I said, it may have to be a group effort. شو بدك بدمشق، روح على فلسطين !! Ramallite (talk) 15:44, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Khalid Bakdash[edit]

Good job on the article. Really puts my two-paragraph stub to shame. :) --Schrei 00:11, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Blocks[edit]

Thanks for your comments, I think I understand the spirit in which you made them and I see where you're coming from. I've been blocked five times. The first was for a 3RR, for which I put up my hands. The fourth was by an admin who took the edit summaries of others at face value, and with whom I afterwards came to an agreement (see User talk:Talrias). The other three were all from an admin who has very strong views on Irish history and politics, with whom you are familiar. The alternate terms I use, I don't use them wholesale, but I think Wikipedia would be the poorer without them. Many of those reverting my edits are, I believe, led by emotion, and I hope they will desist when this dawns on them. The trenchant opposition to my suggestions for the IRA page is a good example of this, I think.

Lapsed Pacifist 19:02, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Syrian parties[edit]

I used a report (ambtsbericht) of the Dutch ministry of foreign affairs. You are welcome to add information. -Electionworld 06:33, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Arab-Israeli conflict[edit]

I've left a question for you there, I'd appreciate it if you could respond. Jayjg (talk) 16:42, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it was dhimmi. Jayjg (talk) 20:03, 19 September 2005 (UTC)</nowiki>[reply]

LPMCOTW[edit]

Hi,

have a look at Wikipedia:Leftist Parties and Movements Collaboration of the Week. --Soman 20:17, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cyrus Farivar afd?[edit]

I'm confused about [this edit . I don't think he's supposed to be on Afd at the moment, unless you want to nominate him. Kappa 00:25, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merge[edit]

I added a comment by Tony Sidaway from the mailing list to your Help desk question. Maybe you'd like to contact him at User talk:Tony Sidaway with further questions. - Mgm|(talk) 18:15, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Funny[edit]

شكراً that was pretty funny. I hope you enjoyed/are enjoying Lebanon. As for me, luckily I spend a lot of time abroad doing research (as long as my visa gets renewed), it helps keep my sanity. But I can never get used to that revolving gate through the wall into Ramallah at the Qalandia checkpoint. And leaving again is even worse, the wall keeps gobbling up more land so I have to take longer detours to get to the border each time. Anyway, thanks for pointing out that edit :) Ramallite (talk) 06:19, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Leanbh beag (moved from user page and slightly reformatted)[edit]

Cad é mar atá tú? I see you've stated on Irish name that "beag" as a nickname added to a child's name may suggest it was born small, including possibly less than nine months after marriage. I'd never heard this before. Do you have any source you can point to for it? I'm not trying to cast doubt on it, particularly as I'm far from being particularly knowledgeable about these things, but it's always a good idea to cite a source (preferably a printed one, but a credible internet source is fine too) when introducing ideas people may not have come across before into articles.

Beir bua, Palmiro | Talk 21:18, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's been mentioned to me a few times and i've only once seen it in a book which I think was Trinity by Leon Uris, but i'd have to double check that. I remember asking my Mum at the time coz I thought it was interesting and she had heard of the practice. I'll do a quick look around and see if I can a) confirm that, and b) come up with a better reference.
It was noted a bit sarcastically. They were calling their new born, strapping 8 pound son, Jimmy Beag, to imply that having been born at six months after the marriage he was premature Bandraoi 21:26, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Iraqi refugees in Syria - Christian emigration article[edit]

Yes thats fine but i want you to know that assyrians and chaldeans are the same people and speaks the same language and they see themselves as suraye in their own language.--Sargon 17:08, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Foods[edit]

Hi - I'm glad you had a good time, I've heard great things about Lebanon but unfortunately haven't been, Palestinians are not allowed into Lebanon (or any other Arab country except Jordan) without extra visa harassment, and I don't think they even recognize the Palestinian Authority passport, it's all part of the great "Arab solidarity with Palestine" BS. Good luck with your Syrian paperwork, I guess you must be one of those people who can make the best out of any situation you are in, because from what I've heard, I'd be pretty depressed in a place like Syria. To answer your questions, your description of Shanklish sounds pretty familiar, but I'm not at all familiar with the name. The bread you described is most probably Khubz Arabi that's rolled into a "lafeh" to make the sandwich. I'll check with one other person I know about shanklish because something tells me it MAY be known by a different name in Palestine. I'll get back to you on that if I find out more. Don't worry too much about the barrier article, the user seems to insist on reverting despite the great similarity of the content. Now the "Effects of Palestinians" section is totally messed up with some incorrect language and redundant sentences, but I'm not in the mood to touch it for the time being because he'll probably just revert it and begin pasting pages and pages of quotes and explanations again, and I need a break from that. In any case, thanks for your message. Cheers Ramallite (talk) 19:37, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dhimmi[edit]

Hey Palmiro, I saw some of your edits to the Dhimmi article and I thought you did a pretty good job keeping it neutral. Although it seems obvious that the Dhimmi concept comes from the Pact of Umar and the Dhimma treaty, some users are using original research and saying it comes directly from the Qur'an. If you could look at the article it would be much appreciated. Yuber(talk) 01:52, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks anyway. All I really need someone to do is to check over the source I provided and make sure it does in fact agree with what I'm saying. It seems it's once in a blue moon that someone contributes to a Syria-related article so thanks for that as well. Yuber(talk) 14:48, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not for removing the entire Ibn Kathir quote, but for placing it further below. However, it is not the ORIGIN of dhimma. Ibn Kathir is just using the Qur'an to support the dhimma status, but he is not the origin of it, and the most prominent view is that the Pact of Umar was the actual origin of it. Yuber(talk) 20:11, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli Arabs[edit]

Hi, and thank you for your note! Actually, I just started looking at that article a couple of days ago ;-) This because I have just stared an article about Sabri Jiryis and his most well-known book is: "The Arabs in Israel". I hope I will eventually get around to writing a resyme/summing-up of that book...and that would be very relevant to the IA article (IMO)... It was facinating in the IA article: nothing about the time between 1948 and around 2000. And nothing whatsoever about land! That the land on Jewish hands went from beeing a small fraction in 1948 to nearly 90% of the total 20 years later.....and how that was achieved...Jiryas book is very much about the "legalistic" way in which Arab land was confiscated, (I´ve started a "summing-up" on Talk:Sabri Jiryis. Comments are appriciated..) I much prefer to spend my time including relevant material in WP, than in these endless revert-wars.... WP as it is now is just horribly "tilted", IMO. If you have time: do email me. Regards, Huldra 17:03, 15 October 2005 (UTC) Ps: I just did a "google" of "Sabri Jiryis" and the article I created less than 2 days ago came up as nr 2 of 638 entries: Scary...[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your comment. I think that the Israeli Arab can become an ok article, but I fear we will have to fight POV every inch of the way.... Oh well. I did look (quickly) over at the Irish-terrorist link. I guess I shouldn`t speak too loud; I´ve been editing over at "Zionist terrorism".....Ahem. But yes: I agree; the word terrorist is quite troublesome. Btw, I live in a country that was occopied by Nazi-Germany 1940-45. Everybody who were in the resistance movement were always termed "terrorist" by the then Government."Terrorists" and "criminals." In May, 1945, with the exit of the Nazi-government, all "terrorist" were suddenly turned into "resistance fighters" and "war heroes" over night.
Anyway, if you want to see some real crazy editing: look at Bogdanov Affair: one (or both) Bogdanov brothers are creating a zillon new "editors" to make an article to their liking. I´ve used up my 3RRs for today. I´m sure the struggeling editors wouldn´t mind a helping hand: The main rule is: revert any edit that comes from someone with 0 previous edits.... Regards, Huldra 17:01, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again, I´ve written a loooong message to Zeq about his editing. If he does one more revert: I´m out. I will only watch (like a hawk!) that he does not edit/ruin the "Discrimination" and "Modifications to Citizenship and Entry law"-sections. The article now is soooooo horrible: nobody will read it.........or they will go straight to the decent part : Discrimination etc......it is as if he hadn´t taken any inf. into the article at all...LOL! Doen´t worry about the way it looks now: anybody "normal" will see it for exactly what it is........... Just watch it, so he doesn´t destroy the "old" good parts. Regards, Huldra 08:38, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I think it's true that most Bedouins claim to be Muslim (just found out now, never encountered this in real life), although I don't know how much that applies in Israel since in other Islamic countries they may do it just to avoid discrimination. But anyway, my comment was based on my own interaction with Bedouins, who were mostly either secular or traditionalist. The traditionalists believe in the pre-Islamic Bedouin religion (usually), that doesn't have much to do with Islam AFAIK. The creation story, for example, has a God creating a horse first, then a camel, and then the nomad (Bedouin). I'm not sure how many Bedouins seriously believe this, but it's one of the traditionalist parts of their culture, which is contradictory to Islam. Strangely enough, I cannot find this creation story anywhere on the internet, but I've heard it scores of times in real life.
Having said all that, my point still stands that it cannot be said that Bedouin = Muslim, as Zeq stated. Just like the Druze, they may be relative to Islam, but have a completely distinct culture, which involuntarily involves religion.
Also, a relevant page is Talk:Bedouin, where one user says they are Muslim, but may practice un-Islamic traditions. -- Ynhockey || Talk 15:39, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Popular front for the liberation of Crustacea[edit]

It was far too unsubtle. On my talk page, it would have been belly laugh funny, but it's "not the done thing, old chap" to muck about with one's home page. Harrummph!!

Actually I thought that someone else might do the RtM. I don't really support it, so I can hardly propose it. I regard it as the least worst option.

Yes, I've been getting those weird drop-outs too! --Red King 17:13, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Thank very much for your supporting comment. I wish you my best. :) Regards a.n.o.n.y.m t 17:36, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Irish British eureka moment[edit]

Hi Palmiro I think I've finally worked out the best solution to resolve the disagreement on this category. We should split this category into Category:People of Irish descent in Great Britain, and Category:Irish people in Great Britain for people who live in Great Britain who call(ed) themselves Irish (whether they were born or grew up in the Republic of Ireland, Northern Irelandor born to ex pats abroad who now live in Great Britain). I would appreciate if you could support the new proposal at Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion#Category:Irish_British_people_to_Category:Irish-British_people__Category:Britons_of_Irish_descent_Category:Irish_diaspora_in_Great_Britain. Thanks Arniep 14:04, 30 October 2005 (UTC)'[reply]

Hi, thanks for your note. There was no consensus on the rename, so it stayed as it is. I intend to cfr it again shortly as I said above (archive of the discussion at) Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_October_21#Category:Irish_British_people_to_Category:Irish-British_people__Category:Britons_of_Irish_descentCategory:Irish_diaspora_in_Great_Britain). Thanks Arniep 14:04, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nasserism & Syria[edit]

Thanks :-) No, I'm not in Syria. Was there january-september though, studying Arabic in Damascus. And you, are you Syrian, or in Syria? Arre 02:59, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hah, great! Damascus U, I presume... which level? And where do you stay? I've been back for less than two months, but I really miss it now. Arre 22:57, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ah, the souq, the cafes, the backgammon games, the heat, the lying, thieving, cab drivers... i miss it all. and beirut too. actually, beirut might be one of the nicest cities on earth - to be a western tourist in, anyway. the mood was all electric too, when i was there, during the hariri demonstrations. i really will go back as soon as i get the money.

but, uh, rawdah cafe... where is that? i used to hang out in ash-sharq-al-awsat, havanna or sometimes takaya. Arre 23:27, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

sudanese? no, its on a rooftop near marjeh, really close to the iranian cultural centre. you see it from one of the walking bridges. really simple, big place, with lots of sheishbeish-playing, argileh-smoking, coffe-drinking men. cheap too, and its nice to watch the traffic. although it might be less nice in the winter. i think they cover it up somehow with plastic sheats. Arre 23:37, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, you should. i don't know if it's that special, really, but i liked it. Arre 00:12, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A user is trying to have the Template:Irish Republic infobox deleted. Your comments would be welcome. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 21:39, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Request[edit]

Hi, I would appreciate your vote or comment on these two cfms:

Thanks, Arniep 16:06, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Glad to see you are still around. I hadn't seen you for a while. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 18:17, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lol![edit]

And yes, I used to drive my English dorm-mate crazy as I always mixed up "incest" and "incense" ("Do you want some incest tonight?") -Regards, Huldra 14:28, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it wasn´t a "he", it was a "she" (=girls dormatory in school...).
Anyway, if I stay on WP I thought of starting a group (category) for "Praktising dyslectics", or was it "Practising dislectics"? Hmm, I think we would need about 200 "Redir" for that one.... The motto for anybody who choose to become a member of PD would be: "Please, please wikistalk me! (if you can spell...)". Regards, Huldra 16:04, 8 November 2005 (UTC)PS: are you from Irland, by any chanse? If so, I count you as a relative![reply]

Sayyid vs. Syed[edit]

Hello, I have replied: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sayyid#Moved_to_Syed Zain 14:31, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied again. Zain 15:27, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

شكرا[edit]

Thank you so much for your support of my RfA and your other edits regarding my nomination, I greatly appreciate it and look forward to interacting more with you in the future. Ramallite (talk) 04:01, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your attention requested[edit]

Please see Talk:Jordan#Blatherskyte. Tomer TALK 06:27, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

I realized I had done something wrong with the move, but I couldn't figure out how else to do it. If I need to do it again, I'll try that, or just contact you (or someone else) for help. Arre 01:39, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Golan Heights[edit]

Would you mind taking a look at this article? There are some POV paragraphs that claim Syria instigated all the border clashes, and I've tried to fix a few of them using some good sources I saw here [5].Yuber(talk) 03:16, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Palmiro/archive&oldid=1146600253"