User talk:Greyshark09/Archive 5

Welcome!

Hello, Greyshark09, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Doc Quintana (talk) 19:09, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, i'm currently editing a certain public page with tables, and needing a space to arrange and edit info before entering it in its final form to the public page. I'm currently using the User Space, but i would like to keep the info unseen (my user page is seen to all), how can it be made ? {{helpme}} Greyshark09 (talk) 10:09, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello, the info can't be put in a place where no one can see it- the sheer fact that this is a wiki means that things are always public. However, if you want a place that far less people will read than your user page, you can make yourself a sandbox, User:Greyshark09/sandbox for example, and work there. sonia^♫♪ 10:25, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much, that is exactly what i've needed.Greyshark09 (talk) 12:15, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For your excellent cooperation and admirable civility in resolving our content dispute at Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, you are hereby granted this well-deserved barnstar. Congratulations! Frederico1234 (talk) 19:19, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Frederico, i hope we keep our fruitful conversations to bring better and balanced articles. Regards!Greyshark09 (talk) 19:03, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

"Mosaic Law"

Please see the section on Mosaic Law in the discussion page of Judaism before you add that phrase back in again. Continuing to revert edits without discussion on the talk page may be considered to be engaging in an edit war. - Lisa (talk - contribs) 20:35, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

WP:3RR warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. - Lisa (talk - contribs) 20:48, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

November 2010

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles as you apparently did to Mosaic law. Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 21:17, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Certainly, Regards!Greyshark09 (talk) 21:53, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit-warring

Please see WP:ANEW#User:Greyshark09 reported by User:Malik Shabazz (Result: ). — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 02:49, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I have left a comment for you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Greyshark09 and User:Lisa reported by User:Malik Shabazz (Result: both G and L cautioned). - 2/0 (cont.) 04:10, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

WhiteShark1967

Do you know anything about this editor? Dylan Flaherty 22:07, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Not at all.Greyshark09 (talk) 10:30, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Looks a bit suss, don't you think? PiCo (talk) 11:22, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

What is suss? it is not an English word.Greyshark09 (talk) 11:25, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

It is if you're a native English speaker. PiCo (talk) 11:59, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

I speak many languages, including English, but certainly i'm not a native English speaker. You are welcome to educate me on slang.Greyshark09 (talk) 12:24, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

My command of foreign tongues is limited to that most essential of all phrases, "My friend will pay!" I can say this in eleven different languages. "Suss" is an abbreviation of "suspicious". PiCo (talk) 12:39, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

You mean that both users are sharks? Hilarious. You can add this to Conspiration theories page.Greyshark09 (talk) 12:53, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

In all fairness, it's as much the behavior as the names. The other shark seemed to be on a jihad to remove all mention of Palestine. Sound familiar? Dylan Flaherty 02:07, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Jihad is a POV-pushing of Palestine to replace any mention of Israel, Judah and other names in any period. Instead of your own Jihad you better learn research basics, instead of dealing with synthesis and speculations.Greyshark09 (talk) 09:45, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I researched this a bit. It turns out that some people create additional accounts for the purpose of supporting their efforts to make certain types of changes. So, for example, a person such as yourself, who seems interested in removing all mention of Palestine, might create an alternate account, such as WhiteShark1967. The new account would then make some of the changes, distracting from the original and creating some semblance of consensus while helping you game 3RR.

The interesting thing is that Wikipedia keeps records that make it easy to catch people playing such tricks. Dylan Flaherty 02:11, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Then you should not do such things, and apply to the policy of Good Faith.Greyshark09 (talk) 09:45, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll make you a deal: if you won't, then I won't. Deal? Dylan Flaherty 13:21, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't care if you do multiple accounts, but you shouldn't blame others for it without any real proof. Good Faith policy is essential for the success of wikipedia project.Greyshark09 (talk) 14:42, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

No deal? Hmm, I wonder if that means I need to create a User:BlueShark54236542 and join you. Dylan Flaherty 01:37, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Whiteshark seems to have deleted his account. How very disappointing - he had much to contribute.PiCo (talk) 05:10, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

So true, yet I get the feeling that Greyshark09 can carry the torch for them. Dylan Flaherty 07:58, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

This has become a concert of clowns with a monologue by PiCo Doherty. My hopes for any dialogue have hit an iceberg. I give up the conversation.Greyshark09 (talk) 16:06, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Greyshark, I'm more amused than anything else by this affair, and I must say I feel a bit guilty - I don't want to make your wiki-editing unpleasant for you. You might like to delete this thread. PiCo (talk) 08:10, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Sure, feel free. I won't object to it and, as it turns out, you are always free to clean off your talk page. Dylan Flaherty 08:16, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi

I have to admit I was enjoying our Heraclian cooperation - I am happy to go ahead and do the work as you suggested, but I want to finish the Dem-of-Pal name debate first. I may have been overeager, but it felt like we had a pretty good rough consensus already for the move, and after all it was a very minor and uncontroversial improvement to the name. I understand that you feel I undermined your proposal, and I admit I was following the advice here WP:SNOWBALL - I simply think you have no chance at all of getting your proposal through. Having said that, I felt that my move did not close your proposal (I did not remove your tag for that reason) and you could perfectly well have continued the debate for a further name change if you wanted to. Oncenawhile (talk) 00:29, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, we have a good cooperation on Heraclius revolt, lets keep it on. However, i must decline your actions on the Demographics of Palestine issue. First of all, what you did in the first place was not legal according to WP:MOVE, and the issue cannot be concluded as WP:SNOWBALL. This article exists for a long time - thus you cannot base your decision that its existance or title is non-sense. Hence, its not clear (for you and one more person = only 2 people), and you can not do as you wish. Palestine issue has a huge range of views - we already have three different opinions since my proposal. Your second action today doesn't apply to WP:MOVE either, since you cannot put more than one suggestion of rename at a time. I'm asking you to undo your last edits on the page (double rename-move suggestion) and get back to original. I have no hard feelings about it - just wait until January 25th, when I conclude the opinions (i give it a week since publishment of rename-move proposal, since the article doesn't have a large number of editors). If no consensus is made on my proposal then we turn to yours, and see if you get consensus.Greyshark09 (talk) 16:49, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

OK guess I'll just have to be patient. Oncenawhile (talk) 21:35, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I closed the current discussion with No concensus, though i found out even my procedure wasn't full as wiki laws require. It is quiet complicated process to change a page name. If you still wanna go on your proposal i can guide you how to do it.Greyshark09 (talk) 20:43, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Nice new additions

Tripoli pogrom, Benjamin of Tiberias and Nechemiah are very intersting, thanks! Chesdovi (talk) 11:37, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanx, i will start several articles soon, and you are welcome to contribute. i'm mainly focusing on the period of Jewish-Roman Wars, Byzantine period and modern conflicts in the Middle East.Greyshark09 (talk) 16:04, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

I currently switch from Jewish-Roman wars topic to Old Yishuv and Ottoman Syria. A fascinating period!Greyshark09 (talk) 20:33, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Template:Middle East conflict

I have removed the prod tag you placed on Template:Middle East conflict, as prod cannot be used on templates. I copied your deletion rationale to the appropriate forum, which is Wikipedia:Templates for discussion. The discussion for this particular template may be found at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 February 14. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 18:26, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the professional help.Greyshark09 (talk) 19:01, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Template:Arab-Israeli conflict engagements‎

Please stop edit-warring and discuss your concerns on the template's Talk page. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 19:25, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Not at all, i thought i deleted some unrelated information, but apparently this is WP:OR by the user AndresHerutJaim. I'm not interested in any engagements against original research POV pushers, but vandalists.Greyshark09 (talk) 18:03, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

List of conflicts in the Middle East

Before you continue editing this list, I suggest you give a careful read to the WP:LIST. Also, can I suggest that you discuss other people's editing before you revert. Throwing assumptions at me is not going to win you any brownie pointsKoakhtzvigad (talk) 12:51, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Libyan War and BBC geographical confusion

Hey, Greyshark09 and thank you for your feedback! Forgive my lack of correct technical Wiki coding here and elsewhere, as I am completely green to editing this lexicon - however not with basic html code.

Quote from Greyshark09 on Dreamsharer's talk: You have recently inserted information to page List of modern conflicts in the Middle East about conflict - 2011- UN intervention in Libya during civil unrest, which is located in modern Libya. Please notice, that Libya is not located in the Middle East, according to following definition: "Middle East" is traditionally defined as the Fertile Crescent and near surroundings from Egypt and Turkey in the West to Iran at the East.[1] I would herewith ask you to transfer this conflict to a more appropriate page named List of conflicts in the Maghreb (North Africa). Thank you.Greyshark09 (talk) 09:48, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I have been thinking about the exact same thing, Greyshark09, but there are many problems suddenly emerging. First of all, Libya is already mentioned at least two times in the same list of conflicts, as being connected with both the Egyptian-Libyan war of the 70s and the 'Middle East Protests' in 2010-2011. Even in newsmedia, the country is presented as connected with 'the Middle East'. The big question is: 'How far West is the East?'

Take the major broadcaster BBC as an example. BBC mentiones Libya as both part of the Middle East and of Africa.

BBC News - Middle East: Libya

BBC News - Africa: Libya

BBC actually redirects the reader from the Middle East category and the headline: 'Gaddafi vows 'long war' in Libya' to the African category for the actual story.

There is yet another problem. Since newsmedia such as BBC have used the term 'Middle East' for the larger 'Arab world' for a long time, we have a popular reference problem. People might not find the answers they are looking for. Maybe we have to refer to other places. I added the Libya conflict to the list because I, as a 'modern reader', automatically thought it to be in the Middle East. But as I said, I thought about it since, and until you wrote the feedback on my talk page, Greyshark09.

CNN solves the Libya geographical problem in another way by simply merging the Middle East and Africa categories into one mutual category.

Maybe we have to clarify in text and link to several pages to help people find what they are looking for. I know for sure I wouldn't look for 'Maghreb' if I was looking for info on Libya. Most people will most likely never know that is the correct term anyway. And also 'the Middle East' category, more than the 'North Africa' category, would be a natural place for me as a 'confused news reader' to start looking for quick info on this matter.

What is your suggestion?

I think it should be simple - we should use scholar definition, not definition by news agency - who are not experts on geography. According to wikipedia, news are a good source for events, but should not be relied upon as "trusted sources" on professional issues (such as Physics, Chemistry, Geography, History), unless no other professional sources are available. News agencies sometimes use "Wide Middle East" concept (including North Africa, Afghanistan and Pakistan), which is very much artificial and rarely used in professional debate. Middle East is bound with the historic Fertile Crescent (Mesopotamia, Levant and Egypt) and immidiately neighbouring geographic areas (Cyprus, Anatolia, Iran and Arabia). Also do not confuse Middle East with Arab World, which is identified with Arab League, whereas Middle Eastern countries Turkey, Iran, Cyprus and Israel are not part of it. I have provided you the source for proper definition of Middle East by scholar, though of course other opinions exist in academy.

Libya is already listed in List of modern conflicts in the Middle East, because Libyan-Egyptian war was on the border of Egypt, which is certainly part of the Middle East (by classic definition). Wars on the borders of Middle East certainly should be included, such as Turkish War of Independence, which was fought against Armenia and Greece.

As you have mentioned, someone did recently put 2011 Protests in the list - a problematic issue, since these protests have spread beyond Middle East, and even beyond North Africa. We have a similar situation with World Wars - an issue solved by describing "Middle Eastern theatre of World War ...". It is one possible solution here - to subdivide 2011 protests to Middle Eastern, North African, and East African. However, in my opinion it is better to mention local event for each country, as the conflict background is very different for each location, even though they are called altogether "2011 protests".

Therefore, in my opinion, only "2011 Egyptian Revolution" is relevant to the list as Middle Eastern conflict with more than 100 casualties (inter-Egyptian politic struggle), whereas Yemen (Sunni-Shia and internal politic tensions) and Bahrain (Sunni-Shia conflict) might join the list in the future. North African events in Tunisia and Libya are very much redundant to the list, as much as Sudan and other African countries.

Regarding clarification to reader - i think you are right! We should change "Maghreb" to "North Africa" (meaning instead of "List of conflicts in the Maghreb" it should be "List of modern conflicts in North Africa"), since it is a much more familiar concept. Would you like to do it yourself according to WP:SNOWBALL policy, or i shall do it?Greyshark09 (talk) 15:54, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi again, Greyshark09! Dreamsharer talking. Snowball or not, hehe, I prefer you do such changes if you would be so kind. You definetly got more know-how than me to do so. But how about 'North Africa / Maghreb' or North Africa (main category) + Maghreb (sub-category)? It would be a shame to lose the term completely, fighting to maintain a high lexicon standard, here...?

See this new debate I posted on Wikifan12345's talk page - the author of the original list of modern conflicts in the Middle East.

Also, thanks to you and/or the Wiki system for the signature tip! :-) Dreamsharer (talk) 16:40, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Dreamsharer, you should not worry about loosing the term, since after the rename, the older title List of conflicts in the Maghreb would redirect to List of modern conflicts in North Africa. In addition, i would add it to the WP:LEAD. Regarding your discussion with Wikifun12345 - me and him have maintained a full understanding regarding definition of Middle East until now, but you are welcome to ask his opinion.Greyshark09 (talk) 17:00, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Greyshark09, I think you're right about the 'modern conflict' - concept being more familiar. I think the newest change does good to the total picture and makes it all become more cohesive. Keep up the good work! :-)

I deleted Libya from Wikifan's Middle East list for now. I'm not quite satisfied with the popular culture definition. And it is quite possible to find the info in the North African category, if one uses one's imaginastion - a little bit and/or if spesific suggestions & links are made, somehow.

Moreover, I renamed the reference in the 'See also' section of Wikifan's list to 'List of modern conflics in North Africa' and added a free text '(the Maghreb region)' behind the reference. (See also: List of modern conflics in North Africa (the Maghreb region).)

One more thing about the cohesiveness. I've always liked those Wikifan-style-tables for such info, with flags, numbers and all of that, orderly fashioned in rows and columns. At least as short, 'punch-line'-type extra info to break up longer texts. Those endless lists of text, that in fact are informative, don't appear to be so informative, ironically, because they are not as visual. Or 'short-glimpsed'. You probably get my point... I see this phenomenon in the African conflicts list even more than in the North Africa / Maghreb list, since the African list contains very much more info that, sadly, make it confusing. I wonder if the table style would do the reader good, in both of the webpage lists, from a visual design point of view.

Dreamsharer (talk) 18:09, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree, the text-rich format in lists is confusing, and actually undermines the entire list purpose. If you like you can begin to transform the List of modern conflicts in North Africa into another visual list, with much more data and less text. I can assist you on this, since i have already thought of doing it. Such visual list would bring a great deal of order for people who use wikipedia. By the way you can notice the current list is very short, and this is not because North Africa is a peaceful place, but rather lack of inserted information. Doing some research from trusted sources on modern history of North Africa would add a lot of conflicts there.Greyshark09 (talk) 18:57, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Check out the test list at List of modern conflicts in North Africa. See how much more agreeable it is with the eye. ;-) I guess that the easy stuff is to copy, edit and paste the code - and that the hard stuff is tracking down all the various info and references... Dreamsharer (talk) 04:14, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Dreamsharer, you did a nice preliminary work, however it is not legal to make "test list" on a visible official wikipedia page. For this purpose of trial and error while learning, you should make a "test list" on you "sandbox" page here - User:Dreamsharer/Sandbox.Greyshark09 (talk) 16:09, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

PS. I just found out 'the Maghreb region' is a quite narrow term. It seems Maghreb comprises only 5-6 countries. Maybe we should rethink our approach to this matter... but how? Mixing it now confuses me. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maghreb: Maghreb is an Arabic word which means "place of sunset" derived from Gharb "the West".[3] Following North Africa and Hispania, the term included Andalusia, Sicily, and Malta. Before the establishment of modern nation states in the region in the 20th century, Maghreb referred to a smaller area between the Atlas Mountains range in the south and the Mediterranean Sea, eastern Libya, but not modern Mauritania. As recently as late 19th century it was used to refer to Western Mediterranean region in general, and Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia in particular.[4] In modern history Maghreb refers to the five North African countries of Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, and Mauritania, plus the disputed territory of Western Sahara. Dreamsharer (talk) 04:34, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Meybe you are aware - but put your attention that you ar using a wikipedia quote, which is not a source. You should find a proper definition for north africa/Maghreb in leterature (not news, or unprofessional website) and go with this by defining it in the lead. In addition, i left you a message on Talk:List of modern conflicts in North Africa page.Greyshark09 (talk) 16:09, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Middle East and Arab world geographical confusion (Greyshark09's copy of Wikifan12345 talk)

It is true that Albert Habib Hourani (or one of his co-writers), in 1993, says on page 2 in the book 'The Modern Middle East: a reader' , that you (Wikifan12345) quoted, that: 'For the purposes of this book, the 'Middle East' is regarded as including the area covered by what are now the states of Turkey, Iran and Israel, and the Arab states from Egypt eastwards.' However, let's take a closer look at the continuation and how the author himself explaines the troublesome nature of this definition: 'This definition, like all such definitions is to some extent arbitrary.' In fact, he states that: 'It would have been possible to look westwards from Egypt to the Arab countries of North Africa, or eastwards from Iran to Afghanistan' (...as a former non-editing-Wiki reader, I wondered why that major US/UN involvement wasn't there, by the way - Dreamsharer's comment..) 'and south Asia, or westwards again from Turkey to those parts of south-eastern Europe which for so long formed part of the Ottoman or 'Turkish' Empire.'

I think there is a very thin line seperating 'the Middle East' term and 'the Arab World' term in the mutual & common understanding.

If this geographical definition is a problem to the professionals on the topic, it undoubtedly is an even greater problem to common people. And as a result, ordinary people (such as I) automatically think that the Middle East and the Arab World are the same. My intentions with this debate, is to try and find ways to how we can help ordinary people find relevant things on this topic on Wikipedia. Those are probably the main users anyway, not the pro's. And even the pro's seem to have trouble narrowing it down or defining it properly. Best regards. Dreamsharer (talk) 16:22, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Deleted by Dreamsharer. (Former: 'Middle East and Arab world geographical confusion'.) As Wikifan12345 has told me he is under a comprehensive ban on Arab-Israeli conflicts, I see no point in pursuing this matter any further and so I delete the entire case. Dreamsharer (talk) 03:14, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

What deleted case are we talking about? It is not adviced to delete discussions, but to finish them.Greyshark09 (talk) 16:34, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

RM alert

There's a move request discussion going on at Talk:Foreign relations of the Palestinian National Authority#Requested move, with which you were previously involved. I'd be grateful if you could contribute to the new discussion. Nightw 08:24, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi

Good news on Safed 1660 "keep". Worth adding notable attacks on the Yishuv, to the Y. Hayashan template? Chesdovi (talk) 14:23, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Not exactly a keep, we rather found more credible sources and the information was changed accordingly (now it is a "1660 destruction of Safed"). I'm not in favor of adding specifically vilent events, but maybe key events - like 1660 attacks in Galilee, 1834 Revolt, major earthquakes and major events like re-establishment of Tiberias. Also i think it is better to specify Jewish communities (cities like Tiberias, Safed, Acco, Shefaram, Hebron, Jerusalem, Gaza, Ramle etc.) in "communities" section instead of general Jewish denominations (Perushim, Hasidim, Sepharadim, and Mista'arbim which is missing by the way).Greyshark09 (talk) 14:55, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

We can add any events that impacted on the yishuv. Towns with a significant J pop. can be added under communites, and only pages about actual sects in EY should be included under "groups" or something. Chesdovi (talk) 15:17, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, something like that. Please make some edits you think are needed, i will work on the related articles in the coming weeks. BTW, Do you read square Aramaic writing?Greyshark09 (talk) 15:26, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Possibly. What word? Chesdovi (talk) 15:33, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Do you happen to know the time window of the Old Yishuv? I thought it was a general term for entire period between Arab conquest in 7th century until 20th century, but apparently i saw it being placed between 18th to early 20th century. Which is right?Greyshark09 (talk) 20:30, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

One thinks of it in terms of the more recent centuries, rather than referring to the post Roman community, however: Israeli society: Volume 1967, Part 2 Shmuel Noah Eisenstadt - 1967: "Historically, the Old Yishuv goes back to remote antiquity as, with the exception of two centuries of Crusader domination, Palestine always had a Jewish population. The immigrations beginning in the thirteenth century with the disintegration of the Frankish kingdoms set the pattern for the Old Yishuv as it appeared in the ensuing centuries...". Where was it placed? Chesdovi (talk) 22:46, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

2011 Kurdish protests in Turkey

Hey, it's getting pretty lonely being the main editor over at 2011 Kurdish protests in Turkey, especially considering the rash of vandalism to the page. It's pretty much an orphan page right now, too, with that dispute over adding it to the 2010-2011 Middle East and North Africa protests page still pending. I don't suppose I could prevail upon you to just check in there periodically and give me a hand with editing, revising, etc.? Keep an eye out for news updates and whatnot, too, if you could...cheers! -Kudzu1 (talk) 01:01, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm already keeping some eye on it (i was the one who renamed it to "2011 Kurdish protests in Turkey" from "2011 Kurdish Revolution"), but i'm not really interested in real time articles. My interest in regard to this page was solely because of my interest in Middle Eastern history, where i'm active on articles of 20th century history of the Kurds. I would certainly help if things are getting out of hand.Greyshark09 (talk) 19:21, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

RM alert

The move request at Talk:Foreign relations of the Palestinian National Authority was closed, so we're now taking suggestions for an alternative. As you were involved in the previous discussion, I'd be grateful if you could contribute to the new one. Please lodge your support for a proposal, or make one of your own. Night w2 (talk) 04:25, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of 2005 Ahwazi unrest for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2005 Ahwazi unrest is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at its deletion discussion page until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.Thank you --Alborz Fallah (talk) 16:57, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Formal Warning - Personal attacks

You need to cease and desist with your personal attacks against me. This will be your one and last warning. WP:PERSONAL clearly states that you should only "Comment on content, not on the contributor" and "personal attacks,... based on nationality of an editor are often grounds for an immediate, indefinite block". You're clearly in violation of both clauses of this policy by making comments about me as oppose to the content in dispute, nationality-based comments like "Kurdo and his Persian friends" etc . If you persist, you will be reported and blocked. Kurdo777 (talk) 02:59, 9 June 2011 (UTC)