Jump to content

User talk:Nableezy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jo Jc Jo (talk | contribs) at 15:08, 10 November 2023 (→Saying Sorry!: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

RFC extended confirmed

Please stop adding {{RFC extended confirmed}} to discussions, it causes breakage of the RfC listings. I have found three instances so far:

Thankyou for your co-operation. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:37, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ok, is there some method of informing users that doesn’t break the rfc listing? The notavote template does the same? nableezy - 19:13, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The {{not a vote}} tag doesn't call in Legobot. It's fine to use in an RfC, but should not be inside the RfC statement; and if used before the {{rfc}} tag, won't be seen by anybody following the link from the RfC listings or from FRS notices. It's best used at the start of the discussion/survey, as here. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:32, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So if the {{RFC extended confirmed}} removes the parts on determining if you are extended confirmed would that work? nableezy - 22:09, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No. It is the presence of the tag itself that is the problem. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:44, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok well then the template is useless and might as well be deleted (I modified it from the RM one), and if you have any suggestions on how to notify people that some RFCs have higher requirements for participation than most others be very helpful to hear. nableezy - 22:48, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, so you created a fork of Template:RM extended confirmed without giving attribution, which is contrary to WP:CWW. There was no need to create another template: you could have used {{RM extended confirmed|a-i|other=RfC}}. I suggest that you tag Template:RFC extended confirmed with {{db-author}}. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:01, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, didnt consider the attribution but yes. But from what I can tell if I do {{RM extended confirmed|a-i|other=RfC}} in the RFC that will have the same result as this in disrupting the RfC listings? nableezy - 23:04, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's nothing to do with the code inside the template. The template name was the problem. Apart from that, it's rarely a good idea to create a new template if an existing template already does a similar job. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:25, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok got it, so I can add {{RM extended confirmed|a-i|other=RfC}} to each of the RFCs that I added the other one to without issue? nableezy - 23:27, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see you did that, ty. Sorry about the screwup. nableezy - 23:36, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nableezy. Since you are interested in using it for RfC's, I have added the template redirect {{Discussion extended confirmed}} so that the wikitext doesn't need to say "RM". You can write the notice as {{Discussion extended confirmed|type=request for comment}}. SilverLocust 💬 00:56, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. Editors are expected to treat each other with respect and civility. On this encyclopedia project, editors assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not appear to do at Talk:2023 Israel–Hamas war. Here is Wikipedia's welcome page, and it is hoped that you will assume the good faith of other editors and continue to help us improve Wikipedia! Thank you very much! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 20:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DTTR. Objecting to poor editing is not incivility. nableezy - 20:22, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Just a recommendation, I would suggest (1) striking the false accusation you made against me on the talk page and then (2) going to the map talk page to discuss the issue with the users who have updated the map. Your accusation against me was completely unwarranted as I have 0 edits on the map. Please strike it as, per Wikipedia:Contentious topics, editors are suppose to assume good faith, and falsing saying "Objecting to your continued use of OR in encyclopedia articles is not a FORUM violation", when I can point blank show I haven't edited the map is very much assuming bad faith. So please, strike that comment and then take the concern to the correct talk page and users who change the map. Cheers! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 20:24, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh for fucks sake, I didnt accuse you of OR in that specific instance, but in several others. And yes, this map is full of OR. Fine, not yours. But your attempt to shut down a discussion about OR by claiming it to be a FORUM violation is nonsense. nableezy - 20:25, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of content based on a reliable source

Can you show me where it was said that Arutz Sheva a garbage source? You also removed content from Maariv, which is one of the most-read newspapers in Israel and a reliable source. Why did you remove it? Eladkarmel (talk) 16:58, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per BLP, this hearsay needs stronger sourcing. As far as Arutz Sheva, see here or here or for example the NYT describing it as "a news organization that represents the view of Israeli settlers in the West Bank". Im sure I can find more, but its reliable for the views of settlers and thats it. nableezy - 17:05, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? Agree with you on the need for good sourcing for BLP. But bias is not indicative of reliability, as you've rightly argued many times elsewhere. Neither RSN reflects a consensus view that AS/INN or Maariv are unreliable. The NYT does not say AS only reliable for "the view of settlers." RS also say that Al-Jazeera represents the view of Qatar. But we wouldn't say that AJ is only good for the views of Qatar and that's it. Longhornsg (talk) 22:17, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Arutz Sheva has a long history of being a settler mouthpiece, and for any material related to Qatar I would not be using al Jazeera either. But see for example: such as the establishment of the radio station Arutz Sheva, which represents the settlers, Arutz Sheva, the settlers radio station or Arutz Sheva, a settler source. It is a garbage source, and there are countless other Israeli sources of much higher quality that we can, and do, use. nableezy - 22:29, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Popping back in, though I love talk page debates, as no arguments provided here resonate with me and sound like WP:DONTLIKE. Sure, Arutz Sheva is biased. But bias != unreliable, and excluding a source that is quoted extensively by other RS solely for its perceived biased (but that produces similar journalism as other RS in this area) would be a violation of NPOV, just as excluding Al-Jazeera Arabic or Al-Arabiya, etc, would be. And there's no consensus that AS is "garbage" (despite umpteen threads at RSP). Longhornsg (talk) 08:06, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Arutz Sheva isnt extensively quoted by anybody, so the rest of the comment does not follow. nableezy - 10:08, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If Obama, a Muslim who is not known to have ever apostasized, is elected, then 'Israel is screwed'. That is just one of hundreds of articles one could link to to document the moronic, hysterical, extremist quality of its input.Nishidani (talk) 16:16, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not denying the site posts some looney-bin op-eds. So does the Guardian, Counterpunch, Washington Report, and a whole host of other outlets you would likely deem RM. Again, that has no bearing on its reliability for facts. Longhornsg (talk) 22:12, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Compare how Arutz Sheva covered the material under discussion here and how a more respectable outlet did: A7: The Palestinian activist and terrorist supporter Ahed Tamimi called for the murder of the settlers in Judea and Samaria. In a post she uploaded today (Tuesday) to her Instagram account, Tamimi wrote ... vs Haaretz: Palestinian activist Ahed Tamimi was arrested overnight into Monday by the Israeli army after allegedly threatening to kill Jewish settlers. Reuters: Israeli troops on Monday arrested a Palestinian activist, regarded in the occupied West Bank as a hero since she was a teenager, on suspicion of inciting violence, but her mother denied the claim and said it was based on a fake Instagram post. So we have A7 making a statement of fact that Tamimi did such a thing, before she was even charged, we have Haaretz saying she is alleged to have done these things, and we have Reuters saying she is alleged to have done this things and the allegation has been denied by her family. You think A7 is reliable for facts that Tamimi did these things that all the responsible outlets are saying she is merely alleged to have done, and more than that most of them include the denial? Where A7 simply says, without any substantiation whatsoever, that Tamimi is a. a terrorist supporter, and b. wrote in Hebrew a Nazi inspired threat, and c. that this is a fact so clear we shouldnt even include a denial? Well if you feel that way thats nice for you, I do not. And I will continue to remove bullshit sources like A7 where I see them, and I dont need a consensus that it is generally unreliable to do that. I dont need that consensus for Stormfront either. nableezy - 22:23, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Most read" ≠ good; The Sun/Daily Mail are the most read in the UK, and crap. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:12, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Arutz Sheva hosts a writer driven out of mainstream Italian newspapers because he plagiarized stuff. It hosted articles by people arguing for conspiracy theories about Obama. It is happy with ethnic cleansing. It cannot be used for facts, but, rarely, for settlers' opinions. That is obvious. We don't use The Electronic Intifada by consensus, and the same should go for a partisan rag of dubious worth, like Arutz Sheva on the other side of the line.Nishidani (talk) 22:25, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Arutz Sheva is more than a settler mouthpiece. It was founded by settlers for the very purpose of being a settler mouthpiece. Zerotalk 00:44, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of massacres in Palestine

Notice

The article List of massacres in Palestine has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no material

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Drako (talk) 19:27, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Saying Sorry!

I just saw your reply and I have to say sorry. I reverted to remove vandalism and made my way through all the edits that were made in between to manually reinstated as per RV. I reinstated your edits here [1] and here [2] but may have missed one.

Just wanted to say apologise and happy editing! Jo Jc JoTalk💬Edits📝 15:08, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nableezy&oldid=1184459261"