User talk:Yambaram

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

For interest[edit]

Regarding my comment "both list of massacre articles should probably be deleted" and your response "i don't see any reason why both articles should be deleted - see Category:Lists of massacres by country", my thinking is that there is a subtle difference between the proper name that forms an article title that includes the word 'massacre' and the inclusion of the event in a set of things described as a list of massacres. The former is just a name, a label used by sources, whereas the latter is presented as list of things that, according to the voice of the encyclopedia, actually were massacres. If they were called "list of events described as massacres in X" I think it would be better. Sean.hoyland - talk 18:43, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Undue weight on settler colonialism[edit]

You're planning to explain what your problem with the article is on the talk page, right? Otherwise there's really no way to fix whatever problem you see and the tag should be removed.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 22:10, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

In the "Middle East" section, the article focuses only on Israel. There's obviously bias there, it doesn't require too much explanation. There's no mention at all of the Arab invasion for example, as you can see. I plan to work on this article soon. Yambaram (talk) 22:25, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
You have to explain your problems with the article on the article talk page or remove the tag. People aren't mind readers.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 22:29, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Generally, it's not mandatory to provide a full explanation on the article's talk page for every tag a user inserts. I wrote this as a reason. Now it's okay, right? Yambaram (talk) 22:36, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Now you did. Thanks. You should do that right off, or explain on the talk page. Otherwise what in the world is the point, eh?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 22:55, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Apology on Antisemitism[edit]

I did not mean to attack you personally. I strongly apologize and ask for your forgiveness. Please see the talk page about anti-Semitism for explanation.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 09:36, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

No problem, 'Rainbowofpeace', I wasn't offended and knew your intention was good. Will reply there now. Yambaram (talk) 10:40, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Jewish views on slavery[edit]

I won't undo your deletion since I don't agree with the sentiments that were expressed, but you should note that it said "Jewish Encyclopedia" and not "Jewish Wikipedia". The article in the Jewish Encyclopedia is a reliable source that is eligible for citation. Zerotalk 12:33, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Zero. You're mistaken, please read it again: He said "The Jewish Encyclopedia is full of "antisemitic carnards". Thanks God (I mean, thanks Yahve), jewish Wikipedia debunks them." Regarding the Jewish Encyclopedia source, of course it's a reliable source that's eligible for citation, I never said otherwise. Yambaram (talk) 12:40, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes I was mistaken, please disregard my comment. Zerotalk 12:45, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Merger and 1517 Hebron pogrom and 1517 Safed pogrom articles[edit]

Following your recent comment at the 1517 Hebron pogrom article, you are welcome to participate in merger procedure of both articles into Jewish communities during the 1517 Ottoman-Mamluk war. Discuss it at talk:1517 Safed pogrom#Rename.GreyShark (dibra) 21:49, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for informing me about this, GreyShark, I'll take a look at it tomorrow. Yambaram (talk) 02:39, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Role of Jews in the rise and fall of Communism 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:
  • com/zhydy/jewsandcommunism.html|accessdate=19 March 2014}}</ref> Journalist [Eric Margolis]] wrote "Because Kaganovitch, Yagoda and some other senior Communist party and NKVD officials were

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:07, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks. Yambaram (talk) 02:20, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Listing/Not canvassing[edit]

Hi Yambaram, since you know how to list a discussion for additional comments, can I ask for your help please? There's a requested move at Talk:History of the Jews in Russia#Requested move (2014) and it needs to be listed in Russian and Jewish history sections for additional comments. That's not canvassing, right? Can I please ask for your assistance? Your comments there would be helpful as well. Thanks! USchick (talk) 02:29, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi USchick, don't worry this isn't considered canvasing, and thanks I'll leave a response there tomorrow. Yambaram (talk) 02:38, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you! USchick (talk) 02:41, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
You're welcome:)Yambaram (talk) 01:02, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Abby Martin, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Islamic Jihad and Gaza (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:00, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Canvassing[edit]

Regarding this please see WP:CANVASSING. Dlv999 (talk) 17:46, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, of course I know what WP:CANVASSING. From what I've seen, PLNR is one of the most objective editors in this subject area, and I see absolutely nothing wrong with merely inviting him to a constructive discussion. "In general, it is perfectly acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, provided that it is done with the intent to improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve consensus." (Taken from the the first sentence in WP:CANVASSING's lead) Yambaram (talk) 21:41, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Your proposal on Mandatory Palestine is to shift the article away from WP:NPOV towards an Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs narrative. The pattern of editing of the single editor you invited to the discussion shows a history of shifting articles away from WP:NPOV towards an Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs narrative. Inviting one single editor, very likely to agree with your proposal, is not an appropriate way to notify editors of ongoing discussions. Dlv999 (talk) 07:32, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Excuse me, but how dare you claim I'm purposely trying to shift the article from NPOV towards the "Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs narrative"? This so called narrative is the one accepted by independent history books and other official bodies today, and actually this is pretty much a fact. What you just said to me is as if I said to you that you're editing towards the POV of the anti-Israel website "intifada-palestine" and then linked to this biased map from their website. Again, you're wrong about the the alleged pattern of editing of PLNR - you may disagree with his personal views, but as long he follows the guidelines there's nothing to discuss here and there was no canvassing. I've not made a proposal there but simply asked a question, read that post one more time and see for yourself. Your statement that he's "likely to agree" with me is baseless and means nothing. Others would say that PLNR is probably more objective than those who responded to my post. I'll reply there now. Yambaram (talk) 15:31, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
I didn't say anything about your intentions, I have no idea what they are, I am simply talking about your pattern of editing. This conversation is not going anywhere. If I see you only inviting editors to a discussion that will almost certainly agree with your position again I will report you to the appropriate administrative board. Dlv999 (talk) 17:46, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Lol, fine, but kindly leave me alone, unless that or something similar happens. Also, that "narrative" point you made was unnecessary, and there are things I could say "about your pattern of editing" as well. Yambaram (talk) 19:55, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Abby Martin[edit]

Hi. I noticed this edit. In my opinion this contravenes WP:BLP. Please in future seek consensus for any such edits in article talk or at some central venue before adding them to articles on living people. Thank you. --John (talk) 14:12, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Saw it, thanks, you're welcome to participate in the ongoing discussion on her talk page. Yambaram (talk) 19:56, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

"Russians" in Israel[edit]

I reverted your edit on the Russians article because the numbers you've provided are for the population of the Russian Jewish population; not the Slavic Russian population. I wanted to tell you this because it is in direct violation of WP:OR. This is due to the fact that you're presenting information with a source; yet the source doesn't support the statement. In this case you're passing off the Ashkenazi Russians as Slavic Russians which is unacceptable. Khazar (talk) 22:46, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Khazar and thanks for informing me. First of all, like the user Rainbowofpeace, I want to say sorry if what I said on the "History of the Jews in Russia" talk page was not reflective of reality.
Regarding the million Russians living in Israel, this is not WP:OR at all. It's a well known fact that one million Russians, mostly Jews of course, immigrated to Israel and now live there.
  • "between 1989 and 2006 about 1.6 million (ex-) Soviet Jews and their relatives emigrated to countries outside the FSU. Approximately 61 percent of this movement (about 979,000) was directed toward Israel, whereas the rest was directed mostly toward the United States and Germany." [1] work was done by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, published by Berman Jewish Policy Archive
  • "The million Russians that changed Israel to its core" [2] Haaretz article
  • "Polev’s immigrant success story resembles those of many of the 1 million Russian-speaking immigrants who arrived in Israel in the 1990s. Along with their descendants, Russian speakers now comprise nearly one-fifth of all Israelis.[3] by The Times of Israel
  • "“His efforts to house and absorb the nearly one million Russian-speaking Jews who arrived in Israel in the 1990s will forever be appreciated,” Lauder said." [4], by Jpost.
There are dozens of other sources I could find, but need I see more? Yambaram (talk) 23:12, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
'mostly Jews'. One should be specific because we have statistics, and a quarter of the Russians emigrating to Israel failed to qualify as legally Jews. 'Mostly' suggests a high figure than 75%.Nishidani (talk) 10:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Nishidani did you take the time to read what we're talking about here at all? It seems like you kind of jumped in as you did here last week, where you said the article's title should be changed "immediately", only after the name change was already done. Here, the user 'Khazar' and I are discussing the number of Russians living in Israel, and the fact that many, most, or 75% of them are Jews is irrelevant and I mentioned it as a side note. To get things clear, nearly all of Israel's Russian population is Jewish, definitely more than 75% (I've read somewhere that it's something like 97%), and here's a clarification for you: "Around 4% of Israelis (300,000), [these are the quarter you're talking about] -ethnically defined as "others", are Russian-descendants of Jewish origin or family who are not Jewish according to rabbinical law, but were eligible for Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return.[384][385][386]"
Anyway... Al Khazar (talk · contribs), so what do you say? Yambaram (talk) 19:52, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Maybe I should add this information to the article Rossiyane and not to Russians, which is apparently about ethnic Russians, and so that could be a bit controversial. Yambaram (talk) 14:54, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
(1) 'you said the article's title should be changed "immediately", only after the name change was already done'. The name I objected to is Jewish views on slavery, and it is still there, unchanged. There is no such thing as a 'Jewish' view of anything, any more than there is a 'Russian' view, or a 'Chinese view' or an 'American view' of anything. A nation or an ethnicity is what Gilbert Ryle called a ghost category, a generic term for a congeries of individuals who, by the very nature of their human and internal cultural and social diversity, cannot have a single common denominator other than a passport or 'nationality'. To ascribe to Jewish people a 'view' on slavery is extremely offensive. Judaism, as a religion with doctrinal positions, may have had several views on slavery, but the word 'Jewish' is not an adjectival synonym for Judaism, for the simple reason that it has a double valency, ethnic and religious, and in so far as it implies an ethnic identity, it is wrong to attribute to Jewish people shared ideas about any subject, slavery or otherwise. This is elementary.

(2) In Israel, the "non-Jewish Jews," as some Israelis call them, are everywhere. They drive buses, teach university classes, patrol in army jeeps and follow the latest Israeli reality TV shows as avidly as their Jewish counterparts. For these people -- mostly immigrants from the former Soviet Union who are not Jews according to Israeli law -- the question of where they fit into the Jewish state remains unanswered nearly two decades after they began coming to Israel. At an estimated 320,000 people and with their ranks growing due to childbirth, the question is growing ever more acute. Unlike non-Jews residing in Israel illegally, these are people who qualified to immigrate to Israel under the Law of Return, which grants the right of Israeli citizenship to all descendants of a Jewish grandparent or those married to such persons. But the Israeli government does not consider them Jews, because their mothers are not Jewish. Non-Jewish Israelis constitute almost a third of all immigrants from the former Soviet Union.'Dina Kraft, Jews endure challenges living in Israel,' Jewish Journal, January 3, 2008Nishidani (talk) 18:14, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

I fully accept your apology. Thank you for taking your time to understand the situation and not blindly revert me. That information you presented is quite remarkable because from my understanding, I always thought that the virtually all of Israelis who emigrated from the Soviet Union [during the 1980's] were Jewish and accepted as such. Khazar (talk) 18:22, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

As for that information you had, feel free to add it in the "Russian diaspora" sub-section because the infobox can be misleading. Khazar (talk) 03:25, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Also, the reason I brought WP:OR into play wasn't because a lack of Jewish emigration from Russia, but Slavic emigration. For the average reader, they would think that the +1 million emigrants of Russia were Slavs and Jews. That is problematic because those two groups are drastically different ethnic groups with different culture and genetics. Khazar (talk) 03:35, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
To Nishidani, 1) Okay, but maybe you did not read the entire discussion, because we were talking about changing the titles of the articles "Jews and the slave trade" and "Judaism and slavery" into the current title, "Jewish views on slavery". As it was explained, besides many other reason, we chose this title because the corresponding articles of Christian views on slavery and Islamic views on slavery are written this way. In Category:Jewish views you'll see tens of other similar articles on Jewish/Judaism's views, so it's quite common. I agree with the examples you provided, there can't be a general official Russian, Chinese, or American view of anything, but Judaism is a religion which apparently does have certain views on the subject, so we chose this title for the article, which now covers both Judaism's view as well as the history of Jewish individual's involvement in slavery. Please read IZAK's very convincing comment on that talk page, and you may also propose a different name, as we're discussing it there now. Having said that, I agree with you that using the words "Jewish views" in a title is tricky and somewhat problematic, as "Jewish" also refers to Jews (ethnicity), but the title does not intent to label a view for all Jews of course.
2) It took me a while to realize that this part of your response was simply a copy-paste from the article. It's more accepted and appropriate to use quotation marks when citing a source, or at least saying it's from X source in the beginning... I've never heard the term "non-Jewish Jews" before (not in Hebrew either, and in fact many people in Israel don't care about a person's background. Of course they're actively involved in all the fields of life in Israel - I actually recently discovered that a friend of mine is one of 'those 320,000', but I hope it's only matter of time before Israel recognizes them as Jews.) And to the point: With regards to the sentence you highlighted, which says "Non-Jewish Israelis constitute almost a third of all immigrants from the former Soviet Union" - it is of course referring to these 300,000 Israelis who are Jewish but for one reason or another, didn't meet the full requirements to prove this, which are very high in Israel. But they are Jews by heritage (many practice Judaism too of course), and were eligible for the Law of Return as we said.
To Khazar: The vast majority of these one million Israeli Jews emigrated from Russia specifically, not from Slavic countries. But placing them under the infobox of ethnic Russians might give the wrong impression that they are only Jewish by religion, and are not an ethnicity. That's why I agree we should refrain from making this edit. Regards, Yambaram (talk) 11:49, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

organized Jewish life template[edit]

Hi Yambaram -

Thanks for your interest in the organized Jewish life template and for your work in helping to make it more complete.

I appreciate your hard work. I wanted to discuss a few of your recent additions, which are of groups that are relatively minor (with little history, little or no nationwide organization or regional chapters, and little widely-discussed influence): the BJPA, the JWA, and the LDB.

Those groups do good work. I think a good solution is to put them into all the appropriate wiki categories they belong in (already mostly done), and perhaps to build new navbox templates that are specific to the type of work they do (maybe including more organizations that are not currently navbox'd) (e.g., American Jewish archival organizations; American Jewish legal organizations, etc.).

I did just that for Jewish environmental groups.

In time, once groups like these build a nationwide framework, a strong history within the American Jewish community, and a major stature and influence in the community, I think they would be good candidates to be considered major groups for inclusion in the organized Jewish life template.

Again, I appreciate your interest and thanks for your work. Infoman99 (talk) 19:37, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Infoman99, and thanks for your appreciation and the nice attitude. I'm glad you're writing me regarding this template, because I had actually planned to discuss some issues about. This is a very important navigation template and its quality must not be compromised.
I've indeed put quite some effort into that template, mostly by maintaining and improving the actual articles that are already included it in. Adding new links to that template is the easier part of course, but as you rightly say, some articles require careful consideration in order to determine whether they belong in that template or not (that's why I wrote in the edit summary of my last edit there "the template needs to be re-organized"). As you seem interested, please tell me what you think about the following points.
  • Let's remove the articles that are "relatively minor" as you said. Go ahead and remove those groups at your discretion, and if there's a doubt about a specific page, let's discuss it
  • Don't you think this template should be renamed from "Organized Jewish life in the United States" into "Organized Jewish life in North America"? Many of the organizations, groups, etc. that are currently in the template, operate in Canada as well, so wouldn't it be a more proper and neat name? If the name change is done, a couple more pages (mostly related to Jewish life Canada) should of course added
  • You suggested building new navbox templates that are specific to the type of work some of these groups do. I've thought about it and think it's a good idea. Most such templates already exist, we just need to find them. For example, the recently added article "The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights under Law" could be moved to Template:International human rights organizations.
  • Many links on the upper part of the template need to be better organized. Is seems like many of them are mixed and there're a bunch of Israel policy institutes, educational, youth, communal, outreach organizations etc., that need to need to be divided into very specific sections.
Regards Yambaram (talk) 08:25, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Yambaram. I'm always glad for a civil discussion on here, as things usually get so testy.

I'll address your thoughts in order:

  • I agree on removing the articles that are relatively minor from the navbox. I'll go ahead and do that, and I'll try perhaps to create more suitable, smaller navboxes for them, if I can figure out appropriate grouping.
  • I understand your thoughts on 'North America' v. 'United States'. I have a few concerns about that:
    • The term "North America" is typically taken to include Mexico and the countries of the Carribean. Most of the organizations in the navbox have no activity in those countries.
    • We could expand the navbox title to "United States and Canada". But...
    • Many of the organizations listed do not have a true Canadian presence. For some of them, there is a separate body in Canada that is, in effect, a counterpart to the U.S. organization. For a few others, the presence in Canada is limited to some large cities along the U.S.-Canadian border with sizable Jewish communities. And for yet others, there is, almost by definition, no Canadian sub-unit (e.g., NJDC, RJC, White House Jewish Liaison).
      • In fact, gathering all the Canada-specific organizations that make up Jewish life there would probably make for a good, new navbox all on its own. Wikipedia already has as category listing that could be an excellent start: Category:Jewish organizations based in Canada
        • If an independent navbox is built for Canadian Jewish organizations (and perhaps one for Mexico Jewish organizations), then we could built a super-navbox for Organized Jewish life in North America, that would have the three navboxes as children.
  • I think you may be mis-reading the title of the navbox section on Israel groups, "Major Israel policy, education, and outreach organizations", which is limited to major organizations that are centered on Israel. In other words, in this instance, the word Israel is a noun adjunct that modifies all the nouns that follow.
    • Because there are many American Jewish organizations focused on Israel, this section of the navbox is relatively large.
    • Until July 2010, I had Nefesh B'Nefesh and Birthright Israel in a separate Israel Outreach section. [5] (Then a random IP editor combined it into the Israel Policy section. [6]) It may be a good time for me to break out outreach again, as a sub-section.

Thanks again. Infoman99 (talk) 03:58, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Infoman99, thanks for the reply. You wrote a long response, which I want read thoroughly and examine the subject closely, which for a lack of time I'll only be able to do another day.. Regards Yambaram (talk) 01:48, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Holy Land during Byzantine rule[edit]

Information.svg

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) 17:28, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Greyshark, thanks for informing me about this as I participated in the previous discussion there, so I'll take a look at it now. Last week you participated in a discussion concerning the titles of the 1517 Safed pogrom and 1517 pogrom, at the end of which they were moved to "attacks". I'd like to know what you think about that. Yambaram (talk) 14:25, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
I don't like the title "pogrom" for those events, but we both well know that Once and few more users are not seeking a good title, but wish to dispose of those articles. There is a very heroic urge by editors identified with radical Arab nationalism to POV English wikipedia, i can see it in Kurdish related articles, Iranian related articles, Sudan related articles etc. It is not surprising that those Ba'athists and similar types pop up on Old Yishuv related articles and try to delete or alter anything "non-Arab" in the region.GreyShark (dibra) 17:31, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Very true, GreyShark, I agree with you entirely on this. The question is what to do regarding the(se) issue(s). Yambaram (talk) 21:22, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:1917 in the Palestinian territories[edit]

Information.svg

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) 17:31, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

It looks like a consensus has been agreed upon in that discussion by now, but thanks for letting me know about this anyway. Regards, Yambaram (talk) 21:25, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Just to let you know...[edit]

I have mentioned you on Fringe theories section, feel free to comment or expand on my inquiry.--Mishae (talk) 19:34, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Mishae, thank you for your effort with regards to the subject, I appreciate it. Just an advice - do not open new threads about the same issue in multiple different talk pages and wiki noticeboards at the same time. This will likely waste a lot of your time and will turn out as very unproductive, and the results will be controversial as no real consensus can be reached this way. I'll now respond both on the BLP noticeboard and on Stoltenberg article's talk page. Regards, Yambaram (talk) 08:36, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I was trying to get an advice from other admins, who might weigh in on the issue. I'm all in support of peaceful discussion which shouldn't end in a block, as it often happen. P.S. We loose good contributors fairy quickly (not that I am saying that the others are bad, but history shows). Regards and good luck with your editing,--Mishae (talk) 00:33, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
I understand. If you want to hear others' opinion, maybe next time you could start a noticeboard thread just by providing a link to the main discussion and inviting users to participate in it. Anyway, I just added this information as there was no opposition to this in a week. Thanks and good luck to you too, Yambaram (talk) 13:21, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Jonathan Pollard (1998 interview).jpg[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

Thanks for uploading File:Jonathan Pollard (1998 interview).jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. 07:47, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jews_and_Communism_(2nd_nomination)[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jews_and_Communism_(2nd_nomination). Thanks. MarkBernstein (talk) 21:52, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll vote there now. This new nomination discussion has restored some faith I had in this project... Yambaram (talk) 21:04, 10 May 2014 (UTC)