User talk:Tewfik/Archive 8

• (rocky start) Archive 1
• (until 17-06-2006) Archive 2
• (until 03-08-2006) Archive 3
• (until 04-09-2006) Archive 4
• (until 30-10-2006) Archive 5
• (until 21-02-2007) Archive 6
• (until 27-05-2007) Archive 7

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. For the Mediation Committee, ^demon[omg plz] This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 04:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC).

Your comment on my talk

As long as you have not replaced the tag with the source I provided you with from Shahin, I have no reason to assume good faith. You are quite obviously aware of the discussion regarding her being a legitimate source on other pages. Your constant reversion on my addition of her as a source for the Canaanite name of Bet Shean was quite inexplicable, and invited speculation as to your intentions. I apologized for any offense you might have taken from my comments so as to be amicable, but that was not an admission of wrongdoing. I might add that actions speak louder than words. When you do the right thing and reinsert the material you deleted without regard for WP:NPOV, then maybe we can begin a productive editing relationship. Until then ... Tiamut 16:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

You know that Shahin's book is not a travel book, based on the review from The Independent. If you prefer to believe the misinformation spread by Daniel Pipes, an obviously partisan and reputedly bigoted anti-Muslim analyst, you are free to do so. But don't try and pretend it's me that is having trouble understanding. WP:AGF states "This guideline does not require that editors continue to assume good faith in the presence of evidence to the contrary." My knowledge of your editing track record and your persistent obfuscation and even lying (as is the case here: Shahin's book is not a travel book and you don't even have a copy so don't pretend you know what's in it) does not require me to be a quiet fool. Tiamut 12:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Is Jib (village) not on your watchlist? The discussion on Shahin not being a travel book occurred there and given your involvement in editing that article, I assumed you saw it. If you did not and I am mistaken, I will repeat for your benefit now that Shahin's book is not a travel guide. Since you don't have a copy of it and you have no sources that claim that it is a travel guide, on what basis are you challenging Shahin's expertise (or lack thereof)? Your claim remains simply a claim and your refusal to include the information is therefore not based on policy, but simply your stubborn refusal to give voice to an alternate POV, which violates WP:NPOV. Given that this is pattern with you, as I said, I have no reason to WP:AGF.Tiamut 15:49, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Tiamut, according to books.google.com Palestine: A Traveller's Guide is an insider's look at where, and how, Palestinians live today. It's listed under Travel/Foreign. The purpose for writing this work, as with most you have used, is expressly political. Shahin is not an academic, she's a journalist, and the book itself does not contain one single footnote. It is a personal, impressionistic, political view of Palestinians, not a scholarly work. The problem with your research is you are bound and determined to connect Palestinians to Canaanites, and so are desperately searching for works which make that claim. Unsurprisingly, they turn out to be political in nature, and generally unreliable. You should be starting from reliable sources, and reporting what they say, rather than desperately searching for confirmation for your thesis. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

In an attempt to move the debate beyond the simplistic "Traveler's Guide" characterization, here is an academic review of Palestine: A Guide, in the Journal of Palestine Studies. I think that focusing on this book is sort of unnecessary though as all of the information that has been cited to it isn't unique academic results but rather just straight foward, although obscure, historical fact. I would bet if one were to go to a university library and look on the shelves beside this book one will find others that have the same information. --Abnn 02:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

The book review confirms what I have said. And the issue is indeed this book, since Tiamut continues to claim it is some sort of reliable source for the extraordinary claims she is making. It's not. Let's move on to reliable sources, and report what they say instead. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:41, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

My RFA

Many thanks for your support at my RFA. It ended successfully and I am now a glorified janitor. If I can be of any assistance please don't hesitate to contact me through my talk page. Happy editing! —Ocatecir ^Talk 18:26, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Response to your question

I see that we are in general agreement; I would put place cities and towns & buildings both in the West Bank + Gaza Strip structure, because they are inherently tied to the physical location rather than what government may come and go (especially places like Jericho, which has been under so many different rulers over the last 7 or more thousand years.). I think listing them at CfD wouldn't be too contentious (probably not "speedy" however) but you can always be WP:BOLD and just create the cats and populate them. I plan on putting a number of new articles about ancient (well, classically ancient, 200s & 300s BCE) places in the area and will place them in those cats, too. Oddly, not many of these non-Biblical places have had much archaeologic work done on them since Ottoman times (when basically, the diggers were more interested in gold than history) probably figuring that Classical Greek and Roman archaeologists had plenty to do in Europe. Carlossuarez46 22:24, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

State Terrorism in Sri Lanka

Hi and thanks for your vote here. The article has gone through some major improvement. Its a general practice to keep an eye on the article when you vote at a AFD. Please take a look at the state of the article now. Thanks Watchdogb 01:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Infact the article had over 30 sources, over a period of time it became degraded to the point that someone felt confident to AFD it. No worries, wikipedai does not end tomorrow there is enough time in our life time to create and improve such articles. Please do take a look at it now. ThanksTaprobanus 18:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Haifa Oil Refinery Massacre

Both reports in The Times (31 December 1947 and 2 January 1948) refer to 41 Jewish dead. With regard to the 1920 article you will need at least one good source to support the claim that the riots were motivated by anti-Semitism. --Ian Pitchford 16:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-05-20 Al-Aqsa Intifada

Hello, long time not chat don't think you might even remember, although it was necessary. I see you are still your old hard-debating self, however this time I approach you with an agreement. I think your position on the Second Intifada issue is a good one, but is not helped by all the POV pushing by Humus, who is notorious for that even in non-controversial stuff.

I saw on the arguments someone mentioning "second intifada" is a sensible but derivative referent similar how some refer to George W Bush as simply the "43rd President." Even though we can refer to George W Bush as the 43rd President, his real name is still George W Bush.[...]Conclusions: we should use the real Palestinian name for their uprising,".

That is actually a good, sensible, thoughtful argument, but it doesn't hold: many military operations do not receive the name given by the initiating side, but rather that given by the media, academics, and other sources (ie Gulf war). Other operations are indeed given the operation name, but usually because the operation's name was the one that stuck with he media, academics, and other sources, (ie Operation Barbarossa) or because the event only has discrete significance for one of the sides (ie Operation Nachshon). Just a thought. I know it is weird comming from me, but I think that debate is overrated.--Cerejota 07:38, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I have been around, just needed some time out of the Israeli-Arab conflict pages as an editor (althought I watch em a lot)... BTW, I think Gulf War is the best example: Operation Desert Storm, the name given by the USA to the operation redirects to Gulf War.

However, I recommend that the NPOV stuff be toned down: it is *not* POV to use the name given by one side of the confict if that name is also used by many sources. I think we had this debate early on 2006 Lebanon war.--Cerejota 20:03, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey, your argument is good and logical, however, you do have to recognize that you represent a POV in many an editor's eyes, besides actually being a great dedicated editor. So perhaps people would be more open to arguments not related to neutrality coming from you? I do not mean this as disrespect, but rather because I hate to see when your otherwise great efforts get lost in the POV translation. Why argue neutrality when you can point to Gulf War? --Cerejota 14:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Why did you remove sourced content?

Hi,

Why did you remove a LOT of sourced content here[1]? All of it was sourced to VERY reliable and relevent sources. I suggest you self-revert.Bless sins 21:15, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

But I did add content one edit at a time. And I have done that numerous times. It's just frustrating when I add content one at a time, and osmeone comes and reverts me. The only way to respond to such a mass revert is to revert back.Bless sins 10:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I think I'm onto something big here

See Q: Is the term "Al-Aqsa Intifada" consistently misused on Wikipedia?. I think the solution to the problem might be near and it thankfully doesn't entail the victory of one side over the other. --Abnn 02:12, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Second Intifada (Al-Aqsa Intifada)

That's intriguing... Definitely the inverse isn't: "Al-Aqsa Intifada (Second Intifada)" sounds wrong to my ears. But "Second Intifada (Al-Aqsa Intifada)" allows for a descriptive title, that will not be open to serious challenges from any reasonable editor once it is. Do not allow yourself to be dragged into battle over content, the mediation is about the title. --Cerejota 14:35, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Hebrew translations

Hey Tewfik, I recently mad articles on the Israeli-Arab localities of Basma, Bir al-Maksur, Kamanneh, Zarzir and Meiser, i have their Arabic names but not their Hebrew ones. Seeing as you have added the Hebrew translations before I was wondering if you would again do it for these towns. -- Al Ameer son 4 June, 2007 15:45 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in, but I've just done them, so you don't have to worry about it :) Number 57 16:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Arab localities in Palestine 1948

Hi Tewfik, yes i saw you removed some from the category such as Baqa al-Gharbiyye, but I included towns like Fassuta, Nazareth, Arraba and several, several more existing localities in the list because although it is true of course they still exist (I go to the Galilee every year to visit family) but they no longer exist in Palestine. They existed there until 1948 but now they exist in Israel. If you look carefully I do not include Shagor, Carmel City, or Baqa-Jatt because those did not exist before or during '48 but instead as town mergers constructed by the Israeli government.

I can see however that this can still be misleading and the category could be confused containing just towns that were depopulated or abondoned but if this is the case I can make a seperate category for the depopulated towns and keep this category Arab localities in Palestine 1948 to include all Arab towns that are no longer a part of a Palestinian state. -- Al Ameer son

2006 Lebanon War Mediation

Hi, Shamir1 has opened a medation request for renaming the 2006 Lebanon War article to 2006 Israel-Hezbollah War. As someone who was involved in previous discussions on the topic, I thought you may want to join in. Cheers. — George ^[talk] 23:01, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Flag in Template:Infobox Israel muni

Hello Tewfik. I wanted to tell you that I reverted the flag appearing on the template just for the short term while we discuss the issue for the reason I gave on the template's talk page. Best, nadav (talk) 09:25, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Clarification

IMHO all commons images should be categorized on commons and their categories should be linked from the relevant articles\cats on en, I don't see a reason why image pages should be created on en for commons pics just so people can categorize them on en because as you say, it defeats one of the purposes of having commons as a separate projects. I don't think there are clear-cut rules on this issue but it seems to me like you're right, there's no need to create categories for images on en, any that exist should be moved to commons. Yonatan ^talk 18:53, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Category:Geography of Jerusalem

I put a notice about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Palestine. --Timeshifter 00:45, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Category:Jerusalem

I put a notice about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Palestine. --Timeshifter 11:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Atlas of Palestine

I left a notice about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Palestine.--Timeshifter 15:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 14 June, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mamilla, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Smee 08:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Great work on Mamilla!!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 08:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Jaffa Road

On 14 June, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jaffa Road, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 16:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Israeli cities in the West Bank

I don't really know if there's a precent, but I think it's a fine category for presenting factually accurate information without resorting to POV pushing from either side. Basically, the pro-Palestinian side aims to present these as some kind of colonies and places them in similar categories. On the settler side, the cities are presented as an integral part of Israel. While it has been a while and I don't remember the exact purpose of creating the category, I think it was as a response to a different kind of categorization by a staunch pro-Palestinian Wikipedian, which, as usual, delegitimized Israel and its claim to these localities. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 16:56, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

That would prevent edit warring and POV pushers wishing to delegitimize the status of these 3 cities as 'colonies' and not cities in the West Bank. I wouldn't personally oppose this though. By the way, there may be more Israeli cities in the West Bank in the future, especially considering the next government will almost surely be right-wing and pro-settlement. That's for a private discussion though, not relevant to Wikipedia. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 17:03, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Local council or not

Hi Tewfik, I was overlooking a map and I saw a town named Dabburiya near Nazareth, At first since I haven't seen it anywhere on wikipedia' North District or regional councils, I assumed it was just a small Arab village. However, as I was updating populations from ICBS population spreadsheet - CBS's end of 2005 and provisional end of 2006 Israeli city and town populations (PDF format) I found out that it had a population of 8,900 which would be far too much for an insignificant village. So I'm wondering if it is a local council or not. I was hoping you could find out since you know more about these type of things like in the Al-Batuf Regional Council. Or you can give me the net. document on Israel's local councils. Thanks a whole lot, Al Ameer son 17:26, 15 June 2007

Hey again, I have another town in the North District, on the border with the West bank that I overlooked on an ICBS spreadsheet. The town's name is Muqeible. It had a population of 3,000 in 2005 and although it is not as populous as Daburiyya I was wondering whether or not it is a local council. -- Al Ameer son 23:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Message

I did receive it and I intend to do something about it soon, however, I've unfortunately had little to no time recently. Yonatan ^talk 20:54, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Initial Statement in 2006 Lebanon War mediation

Hey, hope all is going well. Wanted to point out to you that our mediator, Daniel, has requested inital statements by each of us on the mediation page. No rush, just wasn't sure if you were watching the medation page. Cheers. — George ^[talk] 23:43, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

IFD question

Greetings. I left you a question at Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2007_June_13#Image:Casualties-of-the-2006-Israel-Lebanon-conflict.png. All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 00:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Timeline of Military Operations in the 2006 Lebanon War

Hey again. I noticed you re-inserted the statement regarding the two missiles fired at Israel a coupl days ago that I removed. Don't you think that it's hard to link them to last summer's war (i.e., they shouldn't belong in the Timeline of Military Operations in the 2006 Lebanon War article)? Cheers. — George ^[talk] 04:51, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I guess where best to put it depends on who ends up being involved. Given your rewording though, mentioning that it is loosely related as a ceasefire violation (though apparently not by one of the parties to the ceasefire), and clarifying that Hezbollah denied responsibility, it's okay to leave it for now. We need to remember to move it when the responsibility gets worked out though, such as it ending up being linked to the current conflict in Lebanon. Cheers. — George ^[talk] 05:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Hehe, I wouldn't go so far as to say amazing, but at least better than the previous anon edit. ;) — George ^[talk] 05:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Map

I've fixed the West Bank template in order to also show major Israeli settlements in the West Bank, although it will likely get reverted, so I might need your help there. About the fence, I don't really know what parts are completed, and also they're building it all the time, so it would be difficult to make a map, but I could try sometime later. No time to do all this stuff :( -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 20:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Caesarea

The only mistake you did was placing the {tl|db-move}} template below the redirect line. That only adds the page to the CSD category, but the box saying why it is to be deleted does not show up. As such, it is impossible to say whether the tag was placed with intention of getting it deleted, or accidentally or as vandalism. Since I was unsure, I reverted it.

If you think disambiguating Caesarea, Israel is not necessary, I can delete it now. Do you want me to? --soum ^talk 17:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Caesaria redirects to Caesarea, Israel and Caesarea redirects to Caesarea (disambiguation). Which one should I move the Israel locality article to? (I am confused by the i and e; the article lists ...rea as the spelling but if I move it to Caesaria (the one you tagged), the title would be spelt differently). --soum ^talk 17:50, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Since there are lots of Caesareas, I guess Caesarea redirecting to the dab page rather than any particular Caesarea is probably better. What do you think? --soum ^talk 17:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

And regarding putting the tag on top, no the redir wont work. But wouldnt deleting the redir have the same effect? :) --soum ^talk 17:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Oops, didnt reealize you will respond here. Sorry for the late reply. And yeah, this is probably better. I am moving the article. --soum ^talk 18:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

2006 War in Lebanon

I'd rather discuss this a little than persist with continued re-reversions. I can't remember any genuine reason being given for the exclusion of these lines last year, the whole argument was all rather convoluted.Similarly without them the background still demonstrates an anti-Arab pov, as it fails to mention the role of Palestinian refugees and derides Lebanon's role with weasel words.Nwe 18:09, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Lam Tin

Thanks very much for the review and the edits! A few points that I'd like to respond:

• There's really not much to explain about "estate". The best I can probably do is to link this to real estate, in which the word "estate" shares the same meaning as that in the article.
• Flyover, interchange and podium linked.
• Some parts of Lam Tin#Lam Tin Estate and Lam Tin#Highway and road surface rewritten
• You did miss the Lin Tak Road one. See the second last paragraph of the Highway and road surface section.
• I'm trying to find somebody to see how could the monzogranite thing be re-integrated, but that isn't a big deal.

That's all, thanks! --Deryck C. 07:25, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

A few more items have been updated. Please reply at the article's talk page. --Deryck C. 09:16, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Userpage

If you would be willing to let me, I would be glad to re-design your userpage. I could take in mind any requests you might have. As a sort of point of reference, I have designed my userpage, which is pretty cool, and User:Daniel_123's userpage, which is even cooler to me. I have also done many others, and would be glad to do yours. †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 19:38, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay, one thing to start. Your page seems a little cluttered, (as I'm sure you already know). I was thinking I could move it around to have some important thing such as your barnstars and Babels at the top, in their respective corners. I would give your page a nice background; I was thinking a variety of either soft browns or blues, and put some of your smaller things in boxes that you can click out to display. Then, I'd take it from there, watching to make sure I didn't disrupt anything you already had. Does that sound good? †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 19:54, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, at the moment it remains very unfisnished, though I will finish your page by tonight. †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 21:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Right now, there's a slight error in the display of your page, But I'll fix it tomorrow. (I'm spent from 3 hours of working on it.) †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 23:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes!!! It is finished and bug-free! Yes! Hoo-haa!! Yeah, I know, it's pretty exciting. Please give me your comments on my talk page. (I've only tested your page in Internet Explorer, it has yet to be tested in Mozilla. I'll let you know how it works out. †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 14:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Regretably, I think my expertise (or as close to it as i'll get as a twelve-year-old) is about to fail me with your userpage. I may very well be able to work on the problems with your user- and babel-boxes; though I can only hope to try and fix the display of the hide/display boxes. Perhaps you could convince user:Daveydweeb to help you out there? None-the-less, my evening with be devoted to fixing your userpage as you like it. †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 19:17, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I was indeed able to change the alignment of your userboxes, though I do not know if this is how you wanted it. Either way, I'm reasonably assured I've done my best to fix them. I still can't get your boxes to be open by default. You should check with the user I referred to above. †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 23:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, as I wait for a reply from Daveydweeb, I think that's all I can do for you with the show/hide display. If you have any other concerns in the meantime, I would be glad to address them. †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 13:30, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Cfd

Response to your question: I'd wait a little while, then propose again. I don't think the present situation is so horrible that the DRV process will intervene: they only tend to delete WP:BLP problems that are kept and undelete wrongly deleted things. Sometimes emotions run hotter or colder; I think that recent events in the region probably have the heat higher than on average particularly among some who fear that a united Palestine is slipping away. Carlossuarez46 20:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I may do that; over time one can see that the only people you can get away with bashing on Wikipedia are Jews, Kurds, and gays - everything else has to be on such solid ground or you get the accusations you've got (I got a bunch when I nominated a bunch of LA thug gangs). I don't even know whether you are Israeli, Palestinian, or Latino like me (less likely if Tewfik is your name); and you know what, we shouldn't have to care. Unfortunately, such is Wikipedia's WP:BIAS. Carlossuarez46 20:47, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I wish I could speak Hebrew & Arabic, but alas; I spend too much time learning languages I cannot practice. I did learn a little Hebrew from a friend: HaKelev oseh havhav. All I the rest I know in either Hebrew or Arabic is from the media, Shalom, Salaam, etc. Carlossuarez46 21:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

3RR on Gilo

I should have just left a message, but you only reverted part of the edit, so I completed it. Tewfik^Talk 08:46, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

ok. I should have looked at the diff. I also gave him a 3RR warning, so I hope we're done with this for now. nadav (talk) 08:49, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Should I fill out a 3RR report? I don't know whether it's worth it since it's an IP... nadav (talk) 08:52, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I got him here, though you may want to comment to speed up any blocks. While it isn't always effective to block dynamic IPs, this one seems static and has other types of warnings, so a block would be effective in stopping the disruption (unless he starts socking, but that can be dealt with as well). Cheers, Tewfik^Talk 08:56, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Lam Tin again

Anything going on with the article? Haven't heard from you for a few days already. --Deryck C. 15:01, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind help with the large scale cleanup and promotion! --Deryck C. 14:22, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Article Improvement

Hi. I just wanted to stop by and say good job on the improvements that you made at Gila Golan. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 23:44, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Why revert Exodus

Everything I mentioned is either self referential in the story but not mentioned in the article, or inferable, ie; the mountain Horab is located between Midian and Rephidim because its separately referenced to Midian and to Rephidim. Likewise between between Midian and Rephidim is Elat. Midian lies across the Red Sea from Thebes and Thebes port of Elim which are adjacent stations of the Exodus. You can't leave Egypt and three months later enter Sinai by land since Egypt borders the Sinai by land.Rktect 14:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

As frustrating as it sometimes can be, the policy on no original research specifically prohibits such inferable information. The point is highlighted especially in controversial subject matter like biblical studies, where there are many opinions involved. OR is one of the most important policies, and unfortunately it is also among the hardest to understand. I suggest you review it carefully, and if you have any questions, feel free to approach myself or the helpdesk. Tewfik^Talk 17:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Usually a Bible verse is considered a reference (chapter and verse). If you refer to it it falls in a category self referencing. There is nothing contraversial that I know of in taking several to discuss the stations of the Exodus, ie; they were here, then they were there. Opinion doesn't come into it if you are simply adding the verse as a reference. Rktect 18:55, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Language

No worries. Please feel free to revert my changes. As stated before, I don't really have a strong opinion on this matter, and I'm okay with the way it was written previously using the term "abducted" throughout; I'm just trying to help find a consensus that people can live with. You may have to go down the dispute resolution path (RfC, RfM, etc.) with Abufijli to reach some sort of agreement, as he seems to strongly disagree with the wording. Cheers. — George ^[talk] 17:59, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. — George ^[talk] 21:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Erm, actually you beat me to it. ;) — George ^[talk] 21:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I just got on and saw your message, went to do the revert, and had an edit conflict. Craziness. :) — George ^[talk] 21:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Mamilla

The problem with how it was before was that some pictures were larger than the sections, meaning there was loads of whitespace between sections, particulary in the Ottoman control bit. I didn't know how else to fix it other than bunching the pictures up. Number 57 08:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Category:Israeli settlements

I've copied a message and my response from my Talk to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel to get greater input Tewfik^Talk 17:26, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I've readded all the settlements in the subcats back to the top one too - I think it's important to have them all listed in one place too.

Also, I have been removing them from the ... in Israel categories as they are not in Israel. Number 57 10:37, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Categorisation is just that, a method of organisation, and it shouldn't be confused with content. All of the Israeli settlements are labelled as such in their leads, and are already in subcategories of Category:Israeli settlements. Furthermore, removing them all from Israeli local government hierarchy is quite unhelpful, as regardless of their international status, they are officially and practically part of Israeli local government, and not some fictional West Bank or Golan Heights local government. Again, this is a matter of organisation, and not content, and so I've reverted the changes until further discussion (the changes have in the past also been contested by Eliyak and DLand). Tewfik^Talk 17:26, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I've replied on the WikiProject Israel page - we'll continue the discussion there. Number 57 17:56, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

GA Review of Jaffa riots

Dear Tewfik/Archive 8, I am sorry to inform you that I have failed Jaffa riots for GA status because of several issues, which are detailed on the article's talk page. If there are any comments you would like to make, or any questions you have about the failing of this article, then please forward them to my talk page. Good luck for a future candidacy. Regards, Anonymous Dissident^Talk 13:53, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Rktect

Hi Fayssal,

There is a fuller discussion here, though it got somewhat buried under God. Tewfik^Talk 18:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Tewfik. Thanks for your message. Yes, i indeed participated at that thread ;) Still, my comments at the new thread still makes a lot of sense. Reverting edits as OR is just a poor way (especially when the edits are backed by references) when the talk page is open to everybody. I won't discuss the weight of sources but i mainly point out to the reverting w/o discussion behaviour. The thing i appreciate in you is that you are one of the editors who are keen to explain their actions to others. This is the thing Beit_Or should have done. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 14:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Fayssal, Rktect's references were spurious and the content of his edits was crankish. If a topical ban after the arbitration case against him taught him nothing, further explanations will avail him not. Beit Or 17:34, 4 July 2007 (UTC)