User talk:Nableezy: Difference between revisions
→May 2011: rv trolling |
AgadaUrbanit (talk | contribs) →May 2011: + |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 136: | Line 136: | ||
:::::I don't think S----m is a sock. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User:Sean.hoyland|<font color="#000">Sean.hoyland</font>]]''' - '''[[User talk:Sean.hoyland|talk]]'''</small> 22:07, 6 May 2011 (UTC) |
:::::I don't think S----m is a sock. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User:Sean.hoyland|<font color="#000">Sean.hoyland</font>]]''' - '''[[User talk:Sean.hoyland|talk]]'''</small> 22:07, 6 May 2011 (UTC) |
||
:::::I dont think so either, but that user hasnt really made me aware of them, so I cant say Ive actually looked all that carefully. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User talk:Nableezy|<font color="#C11B17">nableezy</font>]]''' - 22:57, 6 May 2011 (UTC)</small> |
:::::I dont think so either, but that user hasnt really made me aware of them, so I cant say Ive actually looked all that carefully. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User talk:Nableezy|<font color="#C11B17">nableezy</font>]]''' - 22:57, 6 May 2011 (UTC)</small> |
||
== May 2011 == |
|||
[[Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=|link=]] Please do not [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks|attack]] other editors, as you did at [[:Ramot]]. Comment on ''content'', not on contributors. Specifically [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ARamot&action=historysubmit&diff=427921473&oldid=427917599 Where is this imaginary consensus that says that there should be no section on the legal status of this settlement] Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please [[Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot|stay cool]] and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-npa2 --> [[User:AgadaUrbanit|AgadaUrbanit]] ([[User talk:AgadaUrbanit|talk]]) 03:48, 8 May 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:49, 8 May 2011
Template:Archive box collapsible
Palestinian singer
You wouldn't be aware of singer named Mais Shalash, would you? She has an Arabic article (albeit, kind of small). But I am interested in making an English one. -asad (talk) 23:46, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Nope, sorry. nableezy - 12:12, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
There's this thing called ice hockey
I don't know if the NHL makes the news down there. But now that the series is tied, I was wondering if you'd like to go double or nothing on those pictures that are still on my userpage. I was thinking just the team jersey pictures from the infoboxes. Sort of like how the mayors do that. Cause we pretty much run this place. I used to think it was admins but it turns out they're more like janitors. --JGGardiner (talk) 08:57, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
- I didnt have the heart to talk any trash, if yall lose I can only say sorry. But you cant have the jerseys, copyrighted logos. nableezy - 12:11, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
- I see. Well you're free to honour the Canucks or just Vancouver any way you'd like. Maybe Nish would help you with a poem. --JGGardiner (talk) 09:13, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
- Congratulations. Though we should have finished yall off in that power play, Lu was looking like a scared kid. Ill figure something out for the userpage. nableezy - 13:21, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
- But I really should explain to you what the phrase "double or nothing" means (and I cannot understand why a Muslim would need to explain this to a heathen). We had a bet last year, I won. A "double or nothing" bet this year would mean, if I won, I would double my winnings (or in this case you would double your losses). If you won, we would go to a pre-last year state, the "nothing" in "double or nothing". But Ill do something special for the userpage, maybe use the Canuckistani colors in that userbox on the bottom. nableezy - 16:09, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm not sure what I was thinking saying "double or nothing". Maybe I just meant on my user page I had intended to keep the old pictures and add something new. Sorry about that one. --JGGardiner (talk) 21:23, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
- You know your signature has been red on black for a really long time. I'm just saying. --JGGardiner (talk) 21:30, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thats for Egypt, not the Bulls or Hawks. And that aint changing, slap yourself for even suggesting it. nableezy - 21:31, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
- good enough? nableezy - 16:17, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
- That's beautiful, thanks. And I was meaning to change the other edit too. Especially since it was moved by Kinetochore. By the way, you have my permission to remove any stupid comments I make. Just let me know when you do and I'll put them back after if I disagree. I guess you'd have to link this post in your edit summary. --JGGardiner (talk) 23:47, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
- You know your signature has been red on black for a really long time. I'm just saying. --JGGardiner (talk) 21:30, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm not sure what I was thinking saying "double or nothing". Maybe I just meant on my user page I had intended to keep the old pictures and add something new. Sorry about that one. --JGGardiner (talk) 21:23, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
- I would indeed sing praises to Canucks
- In lilting iambic rhythms if I knew
- Hów that word's pronounced, to rhyme with 'fucks'?,
- Or is it 'chooks'? So, please oblige, thank you.
- If delicacy would sidestep vulgar tones,
- Of course I could well ring the changes on
- the amphibrach, Vancouver. Though it drones
- A tad, the chime would fit a Canadian.
- So suffering perplexities as to sound
- I dither here, unable to fulfil
- Assistance of the kind that would redound
- To Canada's credit, unless I channel Will.
- I see. Well you're free to honour the Canucks or just Vancouver any way you'd like. Maybe Nish would help you with a poem. --JGGardiner (talk) 09:13, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
- Alas, eheu, the bard, three fathoms under,
- Prefers, it's said, the silence of his slumber. Nishidani (talk) 09:59, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
- I lived in Central Canada long enough to know that you don't have to be very clever to rhyme Canucks and fucks. I also became quite familiar with the SAQ back East. But thanks for that. I'm a little flattered that you thought I'd know what an amphibrach was. --JGGardiner (talk) 21:28, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
- And you might be interested in the Canadien Stratford Streak. --JGGardiner (talk) 21:29, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
- That's interesting. I must tell Tom Reedy to do a 'Stratford streak' when he next visits England to 'hang out' round Shakespeare's birthplace. I've never heard the word 'Canuck' spoken, and was too lazy to go upstairs for the nth time to yank out, (or is that 'canuck out'?) the 20 vol OED and check it. So we share a common past as SAQs slaking our thirst in Eastern Canada, I see. All I can remember from staying in Toronto was that people put salt in their beer, you couldn't rise from a pub table to order and get tankards but had to be waited on, that if you got closer to the bar, and sat at 'stool' to ease the travail and delays of ordering, you had to look at a pair of tits, and that a local told me these were the dues paid for the country's Protestant roots. Montreal, in those days, seemed to be the only livable city, because alcoholicss like myself were tolerated, and their French patois accents seemed worse than mine was at the time. Nishidani (talk) 08:46, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
- And you might be interested in the Canadien Stratford Streak. --JGGardiner (talk) 21:29, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
- I lived in Central Canada long enough to know that you don't have to be very clever to rhyme Canucks and fucks. I also became quite familiar with the SAQ back East. But thanks for that. I'm a little flattered that you thought I'd know what an amphibrach was. --JGGardiner (talk) 21:28, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
- Alas, eheu, the bard, three fathoms under,
Source
You had access to this source, could you look at it and see if it supports the sentence? [1] --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 11:26, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
- yes and yes. nableezy - 13:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Arrigoni
Hi, thanks for your message on it.wiki. I'll try to give a look at the ensligh version of the article. Honestlty I think that the current version is not so netural and it should be partially rewritten (but from his structure, this is the problem...). --Lucas (talk) 04:25, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, that is very nice of you. nableezy - 05:05, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
"de-gibberishize, what does "between Israel and Palestine" mean?"
I saw your edit in the Itamar attack page. I don't know who wrote the former revision, but it said disputed territory between Israel and Palestine, meaning an area which is in argument between the Israelis and Palestinians. But I do think it is good you erased it, since it doesn't matter whatsoever if there is a dispute over this or that area - killing and slaughtering children and parents is an act of terrorism and a terrible sin.Editorprop (talk) 20:02, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for sharing? nableezy - 22:19, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
- I think this comment is literally the other side of the coin. Cheers, – OhioStandard (talk) 23:42, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
Your sig
I should probably have better things to do than to tell you this, but sadly, I don't. Did you know your signature has an unmatched </small> tag at its very end? It gets highlighted as a syntax error in edit mode with the editor I use (wikEd), and my poor ADD brain has me staring at it for two seconds before I remember, "Oh, yeah. That's Nableezy's signature." If the spare trailing tag isn't purposeful (I suppose it could help you find your edits on a busy page, in edit mode) is there any chance you'd take pity on me and my similarly ... wait, was that a bird at the window? I need to wash the car before the trip to the beach ... ADD kindred wikEd users, and delete it? I checked, and your sig shows up just the same without it. – OhioStandard (talk) 23:42, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
- Looking at it I think it is an unmatched </font> tag. I took that out now, is there a problem with this signature? nableezy - 01:46, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, much better. No syntax-error highlights in wikEd. Most kind; thanks! – OhioStandard (talk) 03:59, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi there
The end |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Nableezy, I used to have a slightly better opinion about you. I mean discussing stolen emails (even if they are fake, but you believe them to be real) is anyway as to buy stolen things. Only somebody, who has no dignity could fall so low. Please have a nice day.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:14, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
|
Fidelity of a translation?
Hi, Nableezy. Am I correct in my understanding that you're conversant in Arabic? If so, I wonder if you'd mind having a look at the video on this page to determine whether it supports the English-language translation that occurs on the same page? It's just a minute and 17 seconds long, and you might be able to save other editors a lot of wrangling at the talk page for the Hamas school bus attack article, if you could find the time to do so. Best thanks, – OhioStandard (talk) 16:04, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
- At work right now, would rather not go to that site from here. Will check it when I get home tonight. nableezy - 16:12, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
- Of course; I understand. You might also like to look at comments I left about it on Roscelese's talk page re its context. Again, thank you. – OhioStandard (talk) 16:45, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
- The translation aint bad, but the way it was treated in the article is way off. The advisor was saying that Israel wished to use the bus attack as a pretext for attacking Gaza. The focus in the article is the snippet were he says that "which was not completely destroyed". And why would an advisor to a politician be quoted anyway as though this were an official reaction? But Ive said enough, the actual translation aint too bad. nableezy - 00:21, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- Of course; I understand. You might also like to look at comments I left about it on Roscelese's talk page re its context. Again, thank you. – OhioStandard (talk) 16:45, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, very generous of you... But your edit notice always makes me want to insult someone, and I know it would be immature to insult you, gratuitously, after you've just done me a kindness. I know! You wouldn't ban me from your talk page for insulting Wiki-petan, would you? She's such a ... no, I can't bring myself to say it; she's just a kid. Sigh. Anyway, thanks again for your help, very much. – OhioStandard (talk) 10:11, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Not so much on top of the rules, but didn't you violate 1rr?--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 20:23, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- I know you are on top of the rules, which is why you rushed to revert there. But no, reverts of IPs are exempt. See WP:ARBPIA#General 1RR restriction: edits by anonymous IP editors, may be reverted without penalty. But you could email a friend and ask them to revert; so long as they log in I could not revert again ;). nableezy - 20:24, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- apparently you're more on top of the rules then i am. no need to email. my "friends" probably have your talk page watchlisted, will see this discussion, and revert. Then your "friend" will revert my friend and so on and so forth. Unless of course we decided to be a little reasonable and admit that history of Jews in Jerusalem is proper background material for an article entitled Judaization of Jerusalem.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 20:31, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- All right, I have self reverted. But I expect you to condense it and make it a bit more relevant. Please do so. nableezy - 20:47, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- I was actually going to add to that section. From what I understand, according to the Bible, the history of Jews in Jerusalem does not start at King David, but earlier. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 20:56, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- All right, you add to it, then Ill condense it. Please dont make me regret setting aside my better judgment and attempting to work with you. nableezy - 20:59, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- If you think it has to be condensed, then condense it. I don't take orders from you.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 21:05, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- All right, back to my better judgment. nableezy - 21:12, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- If you think it has to be condensed, then condense it. I don't take orders from you.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 21:05, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- All right, you add to it, then Ill condense it. Please dont make me regret setting aside my better judgment and attempting to work with you. nableezy - 20:59, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- I was actually going to add to that section. From what I understand, according to the Bible, the history of Jews in Jerusalem does not start at King David, but earlier. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 20:56, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- All right, I have self reverted. But I expect you to condense it and make it a bit more relevant. Please do so. nableezy - 20:47, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- apparently you're more on top of the rules then i am. no need to email. my "friends" probably have your talk page watchlisted, will see this discussion, and revert. Then your "friend" will revert my friend and so on and so forth. Unless of course we decided to be a little reasonable and admit that history of Jews in Jerusalem is proper background material for an article entitled Judaization of Jerusalem.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 20:31, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry for the interruption; logically, history needs to be sourced by historians, not historical religious scholars whom collected the Biblic scriptures. With my respect, and exception of course, to all of our beloved prophets.
- I'm not opening a discussion, tho, just clarifying the reliable source sense of history sources: secondary source. AdvertAdam talk 22:09, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Replying to my comment was continued on my talkpage. Sorry for the interruption Nableezy :) AdvertAdam talk 22:51, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- No worries. nableezy - 23:09, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Replying to my comment was continued on my talkpage. Sorry for the interruption Nableezy :) AdvertAdam talk 22:51, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
AE
I'm sure you've seen it, but here's your formal notice: [2] Tzu Zha Men (talk) 20:42, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks NoCal! nableezy - 21:11, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- You really should publish a guide to the various socks. I wish I had 1/10 of your ability to sniff them out. (I'm fairly certain that Stellarkid is back, but I'm too lazy to bother looking for diffs.) — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 21:14, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- I'd put the odds on Opportunidaddy being a sock of SK around 3-1. When it gets down to 2-1 I might file an SPI. There is another, more active one, that I am pretty sure of, but need to wait a bit for more evidence. nableezy - 21:20, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- I'm thinking of an editor with a shorter name that starts with S and ends with m. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 21:36, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- I don't think S----m is a sock. Sean.hoyland - talk 22:07, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- I dont think so either, but that user hasnt really made me aware of them, so I cant say Ive actually looked all that carefully. nableezy - 22:57, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- I'm thinking of an editor with a shorter name that starts with S and ends with m. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 21:36, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- I'd put the odds on Opportunidaddy being a sock of SK around 3-1. When it gets down to 2-1 I might file an SPI. There is another, more active one, that I am pretty sure of, but need to wait a bit for more evidence. nableezy - 21:20, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- You really should publish a guide to the various socks. I wish I had 1/10 of your ability to sniff them out. (I'm fairly certain that Stellarkid is back, but I'm too lazy to bother looking for diffs.) — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 21:14, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
May 2011
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Ramot. Comment on content, not on contributors. Specifically Where is this imaginary consensus that says that there should be no section on the legal status of this settlement Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 03:48, 8 May 2011 (UTC)