Jump to content

User talk:IZAK: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
User:Chabad
Line 147: Line 147:


I saw this and wanted to note it so that at some point I can consider its merits/demerits: [[User:Uncle G/On notability]]. [[User:IZAK|IZAK]] 14:51, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
I saw this and wanted to note it so that at some point I can consider its merits/demerits: [[User:Uncle G/On notability]]. [[User:IZAK|IZAK]] 14:51, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
==[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_November_23#Category:Anti-Semitic_people Vote]==

Please [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_November_23#Category:Anti-Semitic_people vote] [[User:67.70.70.33|67.70.70.33]] 22:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)


== User:Chabad ==
== User:Chabad ==

Revision as of 22:17, 23 November 2006

Note: If you post a message on this page, I will usually respond to it on this page.

Archives: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; 15; 16; 17; 18; 19; 20; 21; 22;

Dropping in and saying hi

I like the photo on your user page. lol. Very nice. Just to smile at you for being nice to everybody, I noticed. Regeane Silverwolf 03:59, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regeane Silverwolf has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!


Thank you

Thank you very much for the award, IZAK. It means a great deal and I will truly treasure it. SlimVirgin (talk) 09:17, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barry Gurary

Since I was the first person to initialize the article, the deletion confuses me a lot. Thanks to G-d my article in Hebrew is still preserved. In reference to the article in English, I would like to know: What do you intend to do inorder to restore the article? How to prevent such vandalism in the future? I think that the best way to preserve the beloved article in wikipedia is to copy it to your on disk, if it would be deleted and you want to restore it, copy-past it directly. Do you have any suggestion how to restore the same article itself, that was deleted?Narshavs 11:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I proposed it for deletion as it asserted no notability other than him being related to the rebbes and having stolen books. You're making an awfully big deal out of it. Per WP:PROD, a prod deletion could be contested after the fact, and any admin will undelete it for you and submit it to a full AfD discussion. Just ask kungfuadam and he will happily do it, I am sure. - CrazyRussian talk/email 12:59, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I think that he deserves an article as many pretenders to European crowns, even after several generations. Due to Rebbes death and being messiah controversy the personality of Barry deserves especial attention.Narshavs 14:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC) Dear IZAK! You can participate on the discussion of article deletion.Narshavs 19:46, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, not a chosid, if that is what you're implying there. Zero connection or interest in Chabad. Barry fails BIO and RS - as plain as that. Your theatrics to kungfuadam and in the box only strengthen that point. - CrazyRussian talk/email 03:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What "theatrics" ? -- it's my normal speech pattern! IZAK 03:30, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Now I have a few problems with this entire episode. Firstly, do you know enough about the subject to have made that decision? Secondly, try as I may, why can I not find any listing of the nomination for the deletion and your imprimatur to delete the Barry Gurary article on the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2006 August 6 log? Thirdly, why is there no history of your deletion of this article on your own "user contributions" page when I tried to find a link to your act of deleting this article on your history page that covers August 11, 2006 at [2] when I searched for it? Unless you simply treated this as a "quick delete."
That is SO rude. Is that your normal speech pattern? All you had to do was ask ANY sysop to undelete the article per WP:PROD. Have you even heard of Prod before today? Because "closing prod uncontested since 6 Aug" is a perfectly informative deletion summary for those of us who have been paying attention in the last 9 months or so. - CrazyRussian talk/email 03:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And stop soliciting votes - FOR SHAME! - CrazyRussian talk/email 04:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crazy: Anyone is free to contact other editors within reason if those editors have no objections. What is the point of over-reacting? IZAK 04:28, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Crazy: And since you mention WP:PROD, take a look at Wikipedia:Proposed deletion#Nominating a proposed deletion point number 3: Consider adding the article to your watchlist and letting the article's creator know that you have tagged it. You can use {{subst:PRODWarning|Article title}} Did you do that at least? If not, why not? IZAK 04:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Crazy: Also, according to the "PROD" guidelines, stated on all the PROD category pages: "Only uncontroversial articles may be deleted using proposed deletion" and it would have been fairly obvious to anyone familiar with the subject (except dyed-in-the-wool Lubavitchers who hate Barry Gurary) that anything to do with the subject of Barry Gurary being as related as it is to the subject of Chabad's development in modern times and the very basis of the last Lubavitcher Rebbe's accesssion and subsequent rulership over his minions is by any definition a controversial subject and thus did not qualify for a PROD-type of deletion but for a more formal WP:AFD which you then did. This episode also points to how WP:PROD can be both misused and abused when in the wrong hands. IZAK 05:10, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Living Torah Museum

attn. `'mikka (t) 00:33, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Orthodox Jewish communities

Shavua Tov! I seem to have gotten into an edit war regarding Cedarhurst, New York, with someone who has taken offense at the fact that it has been put into Category:Orthodox Jewish communities, as he feels that it is offensive to those who are non-Orthodox. I believe that the term means a municipality that HAS an Orthodox Jewish community; he seems to interpret it as IS an Orthodox Jewish community. I edited the category and added the text "These are areas that have within them an Orthodox Jewish community in which there is a sizable and cohesive population, which has its own community organizations, businesses, day schools, yeshivas and/or synagogues that serve the members of the local Orthodox community", which I believe, based on discussions we had back when the category was first created, to represent the intentions of the category. He added the text "and constitute the majority of a specific community." to put his spin on this subject. Any thoughts on this subject? What should be done with this category, and what constitutes an Orthodox community? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Alansohn 23:36, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shame on you!

You really should know better than this. I am surprised by you to say the least. You are going on 4 years here now yet I have to remind you about the purpose of article talk pages. Please use them to discuss the article, not to editorialize on the article's subject. You may take this as a shocked warning.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 13:49, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation Cabal

Please see: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-17 Religious opposition to same-sex marriage in South Africa. Thank you. IZAK 12:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

World Jewry

I would like to make a new series on worldwide Jewish community/population/jewry. I am entiteling all articles on the Jewish Community of that country as '0000' Jewry, eg History of French Jews is now 'French Jewry' and I would like to change British Jews to British Jewry too. How do i make a new category in the 'Jews and Judaism' series? Shkoiach. Chavatshimshon 19:58, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

STOP your changes NOW!
Dear Chavatshimshon: Welcome, and thank you for contacting me. Regarding your changes @ Chavatshimshon edits Please do not make any more changes or moves to Jewish articles. You are too new to Wikipedia. You are not even reverting articles correctly (by creating multiple double reverts). You are also creating duplicate articles of existing articles, which creates even more problems. The articles you are fiddling around with have been worked on for many years. You cannot move and change these articles without discussing it with the nearly one hundred known members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism; Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish history; Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish culture and others. I am going to ask some experienced editors, who are also admins, to examine your recent changes and to revert your moves until we can get some better idea of what it is that you are doing, and if it is going to help the Jewish and Judaism articles on Wikipedia. Stay tuned. This message is being shared with User:Jmabel; User:Jayjg; User:Jfdwolff; User:TShilo12 and User:Humus sapiens. Thank you. IZAK 08:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ups, sorry. I am new, yes but I've been reading up on as many of the relevant guidelines as possible as I go along. I'm aware I haven't got the editing technique right yet and would appreciate assistance. Thanks for Wikipedia:Assume good faith. About the World Jewry article, its staying and the Jewish Population will hopefully be moved into it. My basic intention is to categorise all the articles on Jewish national and local communities worldwide into Category:World Jewry. The four articles, namely American, British, French and Russian Jewry have (with crztalk's approval) been thus been renamed so far. I wanted to start this in the framework of a wikiproject but he advised against it. Am tuned. Chavatshimshon 11:25, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
IZAK, I've had a look and I agree that he is going totally the wrong direction. And I can't imagine how Crzrussian rather than the relevant Wikiprojects somehow became the authority. - Jmabel | Talk 17:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Talk:Same-sex marriage in South Africa

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. While your comments are about the subject of the article, they are not about the article itself. In much the same way, I am prevented from going to the talk page on Veronica Mars and writing about how it's totally awesome and everyone should watch it. There's a clear distinction between discussing the article and adding a comment to demonstrate your POV. (Yes, I understand that many religious groups oppose same-sex marriage. But your edits, with subject lines like "Shame on South Africa", are clearly POV-pushing, even if it's not within an article.) Your comments should not be included on the talk page. If you want to write about your feelings concerning the matter, get a blog. -- Merope 14:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In that vein, please see WP:SOAP. JoshuaZ 15:01, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation Cabal

Please see: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-17 Religious opposition to same-sex marriage in South Africa. Thank you. IZAK 12:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

heter iska

For now, im gunna lie low and wait for my next chance to rephrase jewish population as world jewry. Whilst my term is clearly more understandible and certainly more encyclopedic, i need to establish myself in the group. anyways... what are your thoughts on heter iska? i would like to wikify it, what are the guidlines on halochos!? are they in the correct categories etc? thanks Chavatshimshon 04:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Host desecration

I need the assistance regarding Host desecration; my attempt to edit this article is being reverted resulting in a supression of fact that attempts to whitewash catholic antisemitism. You seem to have alot of experience in editing Wikipedia; and any advice would be appreciated. Please read the discussion page and the edit history for the article; and comment as you see fit. Thank you in advance for the assistance.--Lance talk 16:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Mediation

I wanted to respond to your message in the South Africa mediation - but because I'm not so much responding to your comments as commenting on them, I thought I'd do this more privately. First, a disclaimer - I want to help you reach consensus, but I think this mediation is not going as well as it could. There are ways you can help with that, and I want to bring them to your attention. I'm not willing to get more involved, and am merely offering a bit of advice before I go on my way - so you can take all of this or leave it at your discretion. But a few points:

  1. If you want people to engage in this discussion, please write shorter posts. No offense, but it is hard to get through all of your post.
  2. As a brief reality check, from an outsider perspective it seems that there was nothing "violent" or "threatening" about people reminding you that your comments were in the wrong place. The more people think that dealing with you will result in assertions that they've somehow acted out of POV malice or the like...the less people will want to engage with you. You need people to engage with you in order to get anything done here.
  3. The easiest way to get people to do that are: first, assume good faith, and, second, avoid words like "communist" and "atheist" and the like. People skim over arguments that say things like that, because they assume that they're polemic rants rather than discussions. So even if you're right, no one will ever know it - that's harsh, but I think it's true.
  4. As far as writing a controversy section, my suggestion would be to tone down the rhetoric and try to reach consensus. That you cite sources doesn't mean that you're not making an argument - arguments cite sources, too. It can be hard to shake that instinct to argue - so how do you do it? You say you've got good experience in writing NPOV, so I don't want to offer too much advice - but you could try writing the controversy section from the other side of your own beliefs. Put yourself in the other side's shoes and try to write about the controversy - what would you say that the controversy is about? Then try to find a mid-point that tells us about each argument, without making either.

I hope these suggestions help. Right now I doubt the mediation is going to take you anywhere, because I don't think anyone wants to engage in the debate you want to engage in. People are ignoring what you're saying - that's harsh, but I think it's true. Consider how you could re-structure your statements to make them more likely to help other people engage with you, and more likely to reach consensus. That's just my two cents, and I hope this helps.--TheOtherBob 19:31, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Dear TheOtherBob: Thank you for your suggestions and constructive crticism, I enjoyed reading it. While I do not agree with everything you say or suggest here, I do appreciate what it is you are saying, as well as what it is you are trying to say, and that you have made the effort to contact me and taken the time to do so. Finally, if there is no headway in the mediation, which reflects very poorly on my "critics" and at the same time it also shows that I am open and amenable to discussion. I will try my best to re-introduce and edit the section I wrote that was deleted by others, but this time, with even more sources that back it up. Thanks a lot again, and please feel free to contact me with advice, you may be surprised to learn and know that I do take advice to heart. Sincerely, IZAK 08:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Military history of South Africa

I couldn't recognize the article after i left it as a stub a couple of days ago. That was a fantastic work. Good job! -- Szvest Ω Wiki Me Up ® 10:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added a picture to Chaim Soloveitchik

what did i do wrong? why wenever i put a pic up, it wont show? Chavatshimshon 12:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

South Africa categories

Hi! Just to let you know, the convention is not to nest battle categories for older states in those for their "successors". Thus, Category:Battles of the Zulu shouldn't be placed in Category:Battles of South Africa (similarly to how Category:Battles of England isn't placed under Category:Battles of the United Kingdom); nesting through the "Military history of ..." catgories is fine, but anything deeper than that should be avoided. Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 16:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Kirill: Thank you for letting me know. I was wondering about it, but I was confused when I saw "Battles of the Boer War" so I was somewhat confused, and decided to be more more inclusive. But as long as you have a rationale here, I agree with you. Thanks again. IZAK 12:45, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Military history WikiProject!

Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Kirill Lokshin 14:13, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proselytism

the fact remains, you were, at first, abusing the talk page to proselytize. this is not ok. please keep your preachin' off wikipedia. Morwen - Talk 09:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Morwen: I see that Wikipedia has an article about preaching, not that I go along with it. Knowledge can be come at and presented in different ways, and quoting a Bible verse is one of them. It did inspire me to write even more that can be digested encyclopedically. Thanks for your response though. IZAK 09:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Semites Cat vote

Actually the preceeding bit was me in that talk in the vote. I've just stumbled on one of the anon campaigners though - the irony is he also removed the NPOV tag I put on the category - regardless of the vote, the NPOV claim needs a serious analysis, Anon is inconsistent. There is got to be a better way to handle this category - it is just too open to abuse by it's nature, it's very easy to Tag a bio and have it go unnoticed. You, and many others have great grounds for this category - but Uranium is very useful - I wouldn't advocate everyone has it. There has been too much abuse in this category - this is why I argue that though these lists should be made and circulated, Wiki is not the appropiate place for them. Maybe there's another way to retain it and not have it polarized? The problem is there are extremeists around this categories existance on both sides. Revisionists trying to rewrite and sanitize fact, and those who will Tag with little analysis. It's people like you and I who do not disagree on the issue of anti-semitism who need to find a way forward. Both of us have used rational arguements towards what we wanted (though with a divergent goal). The silent majority must stand up or the extremes will win. I agree, many of the anons campaigning are revisionists. I wish they realized that one of the tenets here is Wikipedia is not a democracy. One rational claim can outweight 50 anon rants etc. Rcnet 11:45, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need to think about this one...

I saw this and wanted to note it so that at some point I can consider its merits/demerits: User:Uncle G/On notability. IZAK 14:51, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vote

Please vote 67.70.70.33 22:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Chabad

I'm not sure; I suspect that once a username has been used, it stays used essentially forever. Jayjg (talk) 22:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:IZAK&oldid=89720253"