User talk:RolandR/Archive 4
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
Have you taken up the question of the harassment by vandals?
Hi
I've noticed that there are regular personal attacks on you and a certain Tony Greenstein by vandals who set up accounts in names that imply threats of various kinds of personal violence against you. They typically move pages associated with left-wing or pro-Palestine causes, presumably because they know you have these pages on watch. Does this not get tiring to say the least? Have you taken it up as a BLP violation? Itsmejudith (talk) 20:53, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your concern. This has been going on for two years now -- see Wikipedia:Long term abuse#Runtshit, and is linked to off-wiki harassment. I have emailed you about this. RolandR (talk) 22:15, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'll read the email but won't reply by email; might reply here if appropriate. Itsmejudith (talk) 01:40, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the email. I've put a note on the talk page of the user name policy asking why they don't have bot regularly check for certain strings that this vandal often uses. I don't get why the obscenities and violence get through either. Itsmejudith (talk) 02:08, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'll read the email but won't reply by email; might reply here if appropriate. Itsmejudith (talk) 01:40, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
That's an interesting call
On Jewish terrorism, Roland, and once more confirms your commendable independence of mind. I happen to concur with Timeshifter on this. Ben-Gurion himself used the phrase in cracking down on the Irgun and other groups. Of course there is an ambiguity in Jewish (ethnicity) or Jewish (faith), but the many sources which use the expression do not refer it to the latter, but to the former. For one there is a very strong overlap between the two. Still, I am always happy to see someone usually categorized as being on one side of a question, making a call that makes his fellow editors on that side think again. If we had more of this internal difference of opinion, and less collective unanimity on one side or the other, most POV problems would wash away Thanks. Nishidani (talk) 20:35, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- I strongly protest the identification of the ethnic identity of anyone who commits a crime, or is involved in a traffic accident (this vice is taking hold now in Italy with Rumanians, Gypsies and Albanians), as racist. I don’t even like using the word ‘Jews’ personally. So I have difficulty in fitting into wikipedia’s conventions because there is a very elaborate set of protocols that determine what can and cannot be said, and what language is to be used, and I find most of these conventions unreal, especially the unending references to ‘Arabs’ and their terrorism, religious or nationalistic as the case may be. I had a conflict with NoCal100 because he wished to keep the PLO page association of a certain arbitrary list of massacres with that organization after it had more or less be taken over by Arafat, whereas many of the acts listed where committed by Habash and others in splinter groups as deliberate challenges to the PLO leadership. They were ‘affiliated’ to the PLO, but a deep contextual study of each massacre or act of terrorism would have shown that using it to brand the PLO as behind these separate acts was a very distinct act aimed at blurring quite nuanced realities. On the Jewish terrorism argument he was all in favour of an exclusionist definition, on the other page, contemporaneously, since it dealt with Arabs he was pushing for an inclusionist definition. I’m sick and tired of editors doing this, in bad faith, depending on whether one is writing on Israelis or Jews, or Arabs. But we have so far no coherent approach that holds over all these nationalities.
- The 'Jews' I grew up around and were educated with were not religious Jews, but Jewish by ethnic origin. So I have never thought of Jews in terms of religion, but only in terms of their family background. My mentor only made his bar mitzvah at 73, after retiring. So when I read ‘Jewish terrorism’ I read that as meaning a terrorist act carried out by someone of Jewish ethnic background. In Western languages, the very word Jew is so charged with prejudice (as increasingly now ‘Arab’ is), referring to some essentialist stereotype that would brand every individual as one clone of a ’breed’, that of course ‘Jewish terrorist’ subliminally plays up to archaic aassociations with the Jew as eternal alien in our midst, given to insidious practices. But in turn, this is an unfortunate reflex of the very construction of a modern unified Jewish awareness, informed by that building of a generic nationality that underwrites all modern states, by annuling all differences in order to mould a uniform identity. In that sense, Jewish terrorist parallels Irish, Chechyn, Arab, Uigher etc.terrorist, and loses its resonance of specificity, a specificity that might otherwise play on anti-Semitic minds.
- I can appreciate your point about claims, but no one, terrorist or not, in claiming to represent a people, actually is entitled to presume we must accept that claim. Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels. It’s just that the construction of modern Israeli identity, even within secular Zionism is intimately grounded in religious texts, and things are very confusing. Zionism had a strong secular bent, but even revisionists to the right constantly resort to religious language. Irgun’s David Raziel was the person I had in mind while reading these exchanges. Irgun was a secular movement, and yet he frequented Merkaz Harav for many years, and came under the influence of Rabbi Kook's messianism. All of these spoke of the Jewish people, just as all politicians of all parties in all countries say they represent Americans, Russians, etc. This is a very patchy reply. This week I have been typing while conducting conversations with stayover guests all day, and that is not conducive to coherent thinking. Still, thanks for the input. It is a serious issue, and I’ll put it on my calendar of things to mull over in future. Thanks Roland Nishidani (talk) 21:59, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- I should add that I stated elsewhere I had no intention of disturbing the relevant page. I object to rush edits, and that was what worried me about the person pushing the line you approve,(in the context of an edit pattern that is distinctly one of POV pushing elsewhere), not in itself the position. One can make a correct edit, but for the wrong reasons.Nishidani (talk) 22:56, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- I can appreciate your point about claims, but no one, terrorist or not, in claiming to represent a people, actually is entitled to presume we must accept that claim. Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels. It’s just that the construction of modern Israeli identity, even within secular Zionism is intimately grounded in religious texts, and things are very confusing. Zionism had a strong secular bent, but even revisionists to the right constantly resort to religious language. Irgun’s David Raziel was the person I had in mind while reading these exchanges. Irgun was a secular movement, and yet he frequented Merkaz Harav for many years, and came under the influence of Rabbi Kook's messianism. All of these spoke of the Jewish people, just as all politicians of all parties in all countries say they represent Americans, Russians, etc. This is a very patchy reply. This week I have been typing while conducting conversations with stayover guests all day, and that is not conducive to coherent thinking. Still, thanks for the input. It is a serious issue, and I’ll put it on my calendar of things to mull over in future. Thanks Roland Nishidani (talk) 21:59, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Person singular, was; People plural, were....Ashley kennedy3 (talk) 14:21, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Jail the roland
Given the tag you placed on Stomponrance (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), you may be interested in the edits of the recently blocked Jail the roland (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). --Molotron (talk) 12:23, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Carlos Latuff
Are you aware that Latuff took second place in the Holocaust Cartoon exhibition in Tehran?
BTW, I have an ex-gf living in Walthamstow. Between 2004-2005 I was there quite a bit.
Telaviv1 (talk) 16:03, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, I knew that. But it doesn't make him an antisemite; and the cartoon and text I have placed on my user page are certainly not anti-Jewish. As you will realise from looking at my edits, and also if you are aware of my non-Wikipedia activity, there is a specific target for these; and it is neither the WZO nor(להבדיל)the BNP.
- So our paths -- or cycle rides -- may well have crossed in the not-too-distant past. If you ever come this way again, why not get in touch? RolandR (talk) 16:28, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
It would be nice to go for a drink but it'll probably be a while and my bicycle is now in tel-aviv. If you attend FOE meetings you might bump into her. I don't agree about Latuff. If you get to israel though I'll be happy ot go for a drink. JonathanTelaviv1 (talk) 17:09, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
- Not FOE, but East London Organic Gardeners, LCC, PTA and various political meetings. RolandR (talk) 17:36, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.
Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 42 | 8 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 43 | 10 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 44 | 17 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:38, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Runtshit socks
Hi there, I notice that you shunted a sock I labeled today from the probable to the definite Runtshit sock category. Do you want me to just label such socks as definite or do you want to hand check them all anyway? Regards Peter —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter cohen (talk • contribs) 22.43, 23 November 2008
- Thanks for the reply. I'll classify them that way in future. You're a man of remarkable strength. Some editors seem to get scared off by the one-off actions of troublemakers like the JIDF, whilst you're continuing on despite this sustained nastiness.--Peter cohen (talk) 23:30, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
- Well it's similar feelings that have got me into a position where I've been denounced by the JIDF. I'm all for dealing with antisemitism in the most forthright of ways but I'm not going to keep quiet when I notice that some of those doing this praise Kahane. I'll better not say any more at this moment as some of my recent edits are being reviewed by the oversight committee. --Peter cohen (talk) 23:56, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Should I avoid mentioning these people?
Hi, I was going to suggest people in the Islam and anti-Semitism page look at this interesting article [1]. Then I looked at the sidebar and suddenly all those references to Tony in the Runtshit attacks mean something to me. So whilst the material is interesting, if you think that they are linked to your stalker, I had better not link them.--Peter cohen (talk) 12:10, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you Peter. Entirely independently and unprompted, you have identified one of the sources of this campaign, confirming my own research. There are others; but BLP concerns — and, in one specific case, apparently an OTRS ticket — preclude me from naming names here. The blog you have found is nasty, and full of lies; you should not believe a word written there about me or any of the other targets. If you are interested in more details, let me know.RolandR (talk) 12:42, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
- I shan't mention it elsewhere then.It's a pity that Mikey couldn't have put his interested article somewhere other than on his attack blog. I did look at one of the other posts in the blog and the discussion thread arising from it, most of which seemed to be about which of the two sides of the argument was most guilty of fraternising with a certain saxophonist. It reminds me too much of when I was active in politics and there would be chats doen the pub after meetings about how the ICC consisted of only three members or of the ongoing saga around Searchlight, Tim Scargill, Tim Hepple, Class War, Larry O'Hara and Green Anarchist.--Peter cohen (talk) 13:03, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
- WHO : Walter Laqueur
- Proof of SCHOLARSHIP :Director Wiener Library 1964- 1993. Founder and and Editor (with George Mosse) of Journal of Contemporary History.(retired from from Journal 2005)Visiting professor Johns Hopkins (1957). University of Chicago, Fellow Harvard Russian Research Center and Middle East Research Center. Visiting professor Harvard (1976/7). Two Guggenheim fellowships. Professor (History of Ideas) Brandeis University 1967-1971. Appointed member, later chairman International Research Council,CSIS Washington 1969-2001. Founder Washington Papers and Washington Quarterly Visiting professor (History) Tel Aviv University (1972-1982)University ofessor Georgetown University (1980-1991) etc
- QUOTE : "Terrorism in Palestine, spearheaded by Irgun, had first appeared on the eve of the Second World War"
- REFERENCE : 'The New Terrorism', Oxford University Press 2000, ISBN 9780195140644, p23.[2] RolandR (talk) 12:37, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
- Excellent. Thank you.
- So, Lacqueur reports that Irgun practiced *terrorism*.
- He doesn't say if he did something else. He didn't give the reasons (Zionism terrorism ???)
- Next Step : NPoV. Tomorrow.
That AN/I complaint
Hi Roland. As I said on the incident board, I was planning to complain too as soon as I noticed what was going on on your talk page. What worries me is that not only was this editor attacked by the JIDF as anti-Israel, but also pro-Palestinian editors such as Ashley and Nishidani think that this pro-Israeli editor is a good influence. If that is what the moderates are like, what will the extremists do?--Peter cohen (talk) 19:07, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
- I have reported this to oversight. But they have removed only two of the references, leaving more in page history. They have not responded to my follow-up request. And I have received another hostile email from Ceedjee, using his real name, and stating "you and your friends are just fanatics : http://www. (address hidden) poor little guys". Can anything be done to stop him? RolandR (talk) 19:24, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
- It can take a while for them to reply, but make sure you link all the revisions for them to delete. IS he sending you emails from Wikipedia? Have they been sent since I blocked him? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 19:40, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
- I have listed them all, twice. But not all have been deleted. The email was not sent through Wikipedia; it came from the same email address as emails I had earlier received through Wikipedia, but signed with a name, not Ceedjee. It was sent after he was blocked. RolandR (talk) 20:05, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
This is non-binding advice, but I suggest you lay off. He's blocked for a week. Work through an admin if you see something problematic, rather than trying to handle it yourself. Even seemingly innocuous comments from you may be pouring gasoline on the fire. Thanks. Mr. Darcy talk 18:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello. You might be interested in this discussion:
- Talk:Irgun#Major changes without discussion --Timeshifter (talk) 22:39, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
not vandalism
Without comment as to whether one might agree with them or not, these good faith edits are not vandalism. Please don't call good faith edits vandalism but rather, try to use both civil edit summaries and comments on the article talk pages to say why you don't agree with edits. Thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 20:19, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Civility violation
See: [3] Malcolm Schosha (talk) 16:17, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
For the link to the BBC radio program. I don't yet have real player downloaded on my new computer, so I'll be sure to do that tonight. Very kind of you to remember me. Happy holidays my friend. Tiamuttalk 14:41, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for your reply regarding Biographiq publishing's biography being so similar to this article. I noticed that their biography does not include the last line of this article after the inro paragraph and before the section entitled Childhood and family: "He was one of the few Soviet political figures who were never rehabilitated by the Soviet administration." Was that added on some particular date? Any thoughts on this company publishing a biography which is copied from a Wikipedia article with not citation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Syr44english (talk • contribs) 17:34, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 24, 2008 through January 3, 2009
Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 45 | 24 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 46 | 1 December 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| ArbCom elections: Elections open | Wikipedia in the news |
| WikiProject Report: WikiProject Solar System | Features and admins |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 1 | 3 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
It seems that numerous editors don't feel like admitting than from an acamedic point of view and from an Arab point of view, this title is not neutral.
I am confident you have the sources and the arguments to explain to them, with me, they are wrong. See the talk page (and note the lowest quality of the content of this article).
Ceedjee (talk) 22:26, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Trouble with a persistent reverter
Hi Roland, I'm trying to add a minor clarification to Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine but I keep getting reverted by User:Fipplet. I suspect subjectivity on his part as his reasoning is weak. I don't know if you're the right person for this. I'm bringing it to your attention as I spotted your name on his Talk page and I'm not an experienced enough Wikian to know what the right channels are for this kind of event. If you have the time for this, thanks for the attention. ps. I hope to maintain the same IP address for a while but can't guarantee it. 84.13.164.97 (talk) 18:17, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
- That was quick! Should I be answering here or in my Talk? lol. I'm not sure how I self-revert. 84.13.164.97 (talk) 18:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 10, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 2 | 10 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)§hepBot (Disable) 20:19, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
remove trolling
Socialism
I just tried to remove the same link but your edit beat me. It was pretty much a non-neutral and non-accurate conservative propaganda website. So good call removing it. Cheers. --Sting Buzz Me... 00:40, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 17, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 3 | 17 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 00:55, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
No content in Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Fipplet
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Fipplet, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Fipplet has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Fipplet, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 19:22, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 24, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 4 | 24 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Delivered at 04:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC) by §hepBot (Disable)
SPI cases
Hi,
whilst the process is still bedding in, the basic idea is that if you spot more activity AFTER the case has been handled, particularly if a CU has been run, you should add a new report, rather than extending an existing report.
In this case, because the clerks aren't fully up to speed, it was left open long after a CU had been run, which has caused confusion.
I will re-open this one, to save more work. Mayalld (talk) 16:05, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 31, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 5 | 31 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 21:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, February 8, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 6 | 8 February 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Roland
As ever, precise and to the point. If you haven't already, I'll make the edit. Cheers Nishidani (talk) 20:42, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
ILHCR
Hi Roland, thanks for your contribution re ILHCR on the Israel Shahak talk page. Would you consider creating a wikipedia article on ILHCR? It seems you have a number of excellent references. Logicman1966 (talk) 05:55, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — February 16, 2009
If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 07:33, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Some assistance needed re: hewikiquote
Hey there. I found you through Category:Translators_he-en. I'm trying to take over all accounts with the name "Xeno", but I'm unable to find the right page on the Hebrew Wikiquote to make the request. Could you point me in the right direction? –xeno (talk) 18:42, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
|
The Rosetta Barnstar | |
| For your kind assistance helping me usurp the account at the Hebrew Wikiquote, and your ongoing contributions to translations on Wikimedia projects, I award you this small token of our appreciation. –xeno (talk) 21:59, 21 February 2009 (UTC) |
Hi
Re: this 3RR warning, I was reverting a indefinitely blocked editor, User:Nimbley6, and had in fact warned the IP sock about WP:3RR already. At the time you warned me, I hadn't edited the article for nearly three hours. While editing the article I had attempted to discuss the matter with the IP sock, to no avail, as can be seen from the IP's talk page. There has to come a time when failure to discuss edits is seen as disruptive, and reverting such edits is seen as a reasonable response to disruptive editing.
User:Nimbley6, the sock master behind this and other socks, is a long-term troll and vandal, and repeated efforts by myself and others to limit its activities have failed. WP:AIV won't touch it because its edits aren't strictly speaking clear-cut cases of vandalism. WP:SPI is effective in the medium-term, but is not fast enough to deal with IP addresses that change at least once a day. We have not yet tried reporting each sock to WP:ANI for the simple reason that I for one don't have the courage to post on ANI every day ;-)
I do appreciate the need to warn editors who appear to be engaged in edit wars. However, I would hope that you look at the wider picture, including recent and current activity, before you consider blocks.
Cheers, This flag once was redpropagandadeeds 10:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
- No worries, I understand the need to warn both parties. The sock puppeteer tends to "flit" between articles; Annie Lennox is a perennial favourite but I suspect the next incarnation of the sock will move on to another article. This makes protection less useful than it could be, however I will consider it if the article remains a target.
- Cheers, This flag once was redpropagandadeeds 13:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — February 23, 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:
- Philosophers analyze Wikipedia as a knowledge source
- An automated article monitoring system for WikiProjects
- News and notes: Wikimania, usability, picture contest, milestones
- Wikipedia in the news: Lessons for Brits, patent citations
- Dispatches: Hundredth Featured sound approaches
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Islam
- Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 21:43, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Arab Citizens of Israel
Might I suggest that you and Okedem take up your differences on the discussion page? The last thing that article needs is another revert-war. Just a thought. Szfski (talk) 09:53, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:
- Books extension enabled
- News and notes: Stewards, Wikimania bids, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's role in journalism, Smarter Wikipedia, Skittles
- Dispatches: WikiProject Ships Featured topic and Good topics
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Norse History and Culture
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Runtshit
See Special:Contributions/66.112.215.21. This Geolocates to Maryland... The other IP addresses (Special:Contributions/132.74.1.4, Special:Contributions/132.74.99.84) traced to University of Haifa in Israel. I sent an e-mail to them awhile back when he made edits using the Haifa IPs, but never received a response. Any idea what checkusers/others have done trying to get this long-term issue resolved? I know Mackensen said he was going to discuss it on checkuser-l last year, but I'm not aware of any outcome. Avruch T 17:26, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Distressing to see this infamy so nauseously repeated, Roland. The IP suggests 'SP', in my private understanding, based on personal knowledge of several such campaigns, but these things can never be nailed down. Best regards.Nishidani (talk) 18:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hadn't noticed that page, but glad to see that I wasn't off the mark. Much is made of Pappé's troubles at Haifa, but not a whisper of the by now well-known activities of one or two other tenured people there. A pity: I've seen some very fine research from the same University. As most Jews know historically, to be the object of vicious smearing reflects singularly on the pathology of the 'other', the victimiser, and, though it is a thin consolation, only underlines both the dignity and intelligence of the intended victim. If you ever come through Rome, let me know. Best as always.Nishidani (talk) 20:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Rather than give this guy 31 days or whatever as a first warning, have some admin knowledgeable of this ongoing issue be given the power to permanently ban him first time he does it. He'll run out of public terminals that much faster, maybe. CarolMooreDC (talk) 14:56, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hadn't noticed that page, but glad to see that I wasn't off the mark. Much is made of Pappé's troubles at Haifa, but not a whisper of the by now well-known activities of one or two other tenured people there. A pity: I've seen some very fine research from the same University. As most Jews know historically, to be the object of vicious smearing reflects singularly on the pathology of the 'other', the victimiser, and, though it is a thin consolation, only underlines both the dignity and intelligence of the intended victim. If you ever come through Rome, let me know. Best as always.Nishidani (talk) 20:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Distressing to see this infamy so nauseously repeated, Roland. The IP suggests 'SP', in my private understanding, based on personal knowledge of several such campaigns, but these things can never be nailed down. Best regards.Nishidani (talk) 18:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Runtshit
The accounts you linked to are all 
Stale. Truthprofessor (talk · contribs) appears 
Unrelated based on the CU logs. No clue about Borisyy (talk · contribs). There is one IP listed in the suspected socks category, but that looks like an open proxy. I've got nothing for Shmuelsheiman (talk · contribs) either. There were two IPs listed in the SSP case, but one traces to NSW and the other to Germany (open proxy?). Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 14:49, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:
- News and notes: Commons, conferences, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Politics, more politics, and more
- Dispatches: 100 Featured sounds milestone
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Christianity
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — 16 March 2009
— 16 March 2009- News and notes: License update, Commons cartoons, films milestone, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Manufactured scandal, Wikipedia assignments, and more
- Dispatches: New FAC and FAR appointments
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:44, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
March 2009
Quote from you: 
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Trotskyism. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. RolandR (talk) 20:24, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
That's because It was my intention to vandalize the article for no reason.Farkas János (talk) 20:28, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
FYI. Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#User:RolandR_on_Gilad_Atzmon_article CarolMooreDC (talk) 14:42, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
- IMHO Undue weight to details of an event you personally were involved with organinizing a protest against: Soon after Jews Against Zionism asked Bookmarx, the bookshop of the Socialist Workers Party to withdraw an invitation to Atzmon to speak at a book launch because he had distributed to his email list a paper called "The Holocaust Wars" written by Paul Eisen.
- But will just mention it here, to avoid a slippery slope :-). CarolMooreDC (talk) 13:45, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
- This was a correction to another editor's work. The event was not a conference, but a book-launch; and it was to be held by Bookmarks, not the SWP directly. There is nothing contentious in this, and I can't see your problem with it. RolandR (talk) 15:33, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe recent nonsense has made me too picky, though name of venue seems too specific. Whatever :-) CarolMooreDC (talk) 15:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
- This was a correction to another editor's work. The event was not a conference, but a book-launch; and it was to be held by Bookmarks, not the SWP directly. There is nothing contentious in this, and I can't see your problem with it. RolandR (talk) 15:33, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Userbox vandalism
Hi there. Just saw that one of your userboxes had been (very offensively) vandalised: fixed it for you here.[4] (It's a good thing I checked the history to realise that it had been vandalised, I was about to nominate it for deletion otherwise.) Robofish (talk) 18:33, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Artistic Tributes to Rachel Corrie Page Getting Deleted
- Can you state your opinions on User_talk:MBisanz#Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion.2FArtistic_Tributes_to_Rachel_Corrie page. Kasaalan (talk) 19:10, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Courtesy FYI
As a courtesy, you are notified of this, with which you may be involved. CasualObserver'48 (talk) 07:41, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Note
I put a request for the re-naming on the RM forum.
Cheers, JaakobouChalk Talk 18:13, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
- The other Gideon Levy is a Dutch film director for the public service broadcaster VPRO whose output includes a documentary 'Lockerbie revisited' which was broadcast in Holland on the eve of the start of Mr Megrahi's second appeal in April 2009 (see http://www.vpro.nl/programma/tegenlicht/afleveringen/41867169/). On the VPRO website there are links to June 2005 interviews by Gideon Levy (film director) featuring Dr Jim Swire and Robert Black (professor) (see http://www.vpro.nl/programma/tegenlicht/afleveringen/22635723/items/22716459/). Perhaps you would like to create an article on Gideon Levy (film director) and reinstate the Gideon Levy disambig page that was deleted earlier today.---PJHaseldine (talk) 23:15, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Note 2
It's actually correct information (according to RS I've read today) but I think the lead of an article should be phrased conservatively which it certainly wasn't.[5] Anyways, I think you did the right thing there.
Cheers, JaakobouChalk Talk 19:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Hirst again
Hi, query for you here about the Hirst book again. Sorry to keep pestering you to look it up, but I can't find a copy to buy or borrow, and it'll take weeks to arrive if I have to order it. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 04:55, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- No problem. I've answered on Talk:Deir_Yassin_massacreRolandR 08:42, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
RfC
Roland, can I ask you to take a look at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Nakba, if you have time? I see you've taken part in discussions about this before, namely about Category:Nakba. The Nakba articles seem to be in an awful mess, in part because people won't allow that name to be used, so they end up scattered to the four corners. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 05:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi.
I find your revert repeated replacement of academic work by propaganda text. to be extremely uncivil and unnecessary. If you would like to be part of the discussion please join but your edit was disruptive. I don't think I can revert or else it will be edit warring but I would like it if you could restore the edit. Wikifan12345 (talk) 09:52, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Woops
Woops, sorry about this. I misread and thought that was written on the Category page, not the Category TALK page. Wknight94 talk 19:02, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Galloway broken links.
Hi Roland, is see you are correcting a few of those broken dead links, I hope I have helped. I was going to start looking at correcting them but if you like i'll leave you to have a look, regards. (Off2riorob (talk) 16:22, 4 August 2009 (UTC))(Off2riorob (talk) 16:22, 4 August 2009 (UTC))
Vilnius
Having edited recently at the Trotsky article, I placed it on my watch list. I noticed that you reverted an edit that stated that his nationality was Jewish instead of Ukrainian. Overtime, I have had conflicts with some editors over the question as to whether the nationality of of the inhabitants of Vilnius (those of Jewish affiliation) was Lithuanian, Polish, or Russian. Would you care to give an opinion? I'm asking for your opinion based on the historical and geographical interpretation regarding the concept of Litvak. It doesn't have anything to do with your edit concerning Trotsky, and it's not a loaded question. Your interpretation of the matter would be appreciated. Thanks. Dr. Dan (talk) 01:50, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
israel shamir
hi roland! i know you are knowledgeable and used to keeping an eye out for vandalism on that page, but i think some of the last editor's concerns were valid and shouldn't have been reverted wholesale. he did go to the trouble of doing them one at a time and starting a section on the talk page. please join us there and tell us what you think about the blp and undue weight concerns raised. thanks. untwirl(talk) 17:05, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
- thanks for your response. i actually didnt go into the other editor's contributions history, so i dont know what his political stance is. but, i do think that we should be careful to attribute potentially libelous statements and to allow the subject of the blp a response to the claims. i'm not defending his other changes, i'm only concerned about the WP:BLP policy regarding attribution of allegations. thanks again for your quick reply. untwirl(talk) 19:21, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Tallicfan20
I reported him already, see the section above yours. Add a comment if you wish. Zerotalk 14:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
I´m not sure you relize, but this user has now been indef. blocked, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Fipplet/Archive. Notice that he has now started playing games; one of his socks he is Jewish, another a declared Christian, etc. Take care, Huldra (talk) 17:51, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- User:Livetsord was found to be one of his socks; (didn´t you check the links I gave you?).... Anyway; I *do* believe he is quite a young guy... so I have said that if he behaves for a year (and educate himself a bit!) ...then I will support an unblock.. Perhaps that is too "soft" of me, but one can always hope that people grow up.., Cheers, Huldra (talk) 19:32, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Answer
Because he's a banned user who's stalked me for years. Please leave it alone. IronDuke 15:45, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
IronDuke
Thanks for restoring my comments. I don't know who IronDuke thinks I am, but I'm not!. He seems to have a tendency to remove talk page comments he doesn't like -- I saw it recently here. Do you have any advice for dealing with wiki-personalities like him? I'm a little frustrated. Iosefina (talk) 16:57, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Roland, just in case you missed this. IronDuke 17:37, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for your note. You wrote "Please understand, however, that not having your knowledge of the history here, there was no way I could have been aware of this relationship." Actually, there was; you could have asked. I see now you well understand what it is to be stalked -- that knowledge should have made you cautious, and assume good faith for an established user in good standing over an obvious sockpuppet -- and the sockpuppetry was obvious, you didn't need to talk to me to see that. IronDuke 23:28, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Runtshit
Hello
Who is this sock who keeps vandalising Anti-Zionism and other articles (including 1948 Palestinian exodus and The Communist Manifesto) with "Roland the Stalanized Rance" comments? I presume you are the user to whom such comments refer. I see there are many sockpuppets run by runtshit. Googling your name shows a blog entitled "Bugger Rance" perhaps by the same user. Beganlocal (talk) 17:47, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Offensive Blog
- I applaud your courage and conviction. In my view the actions and beliefs of certain Zionists tarnishes the whole community and gives anti-semites excuses for their bigotry. You might want to try and get that filthy libellous blog TOSed for breaking Bloggers Terms. You may do so here. If the individual you suspect has means (doubtful) it may be worthwhile considering legal action. Even ignoring the possibility of damages, it is likely to constitute harassment - you have some recourse if this person also lives in England. Beganlocal (talk) 12:09, 21 August 2009 (UTC)