User talk:Yuber

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

• To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
• Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
• If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
• Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
• Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
• Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

Meelar (talk) 08:07, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Yuber. I think you may be being just a little too bold in adding Category:Arab history to the pages of the Arab countries. There is already a Category:History of the Middle East which links specifically historical articles about Arabs and others in the region.--Pharos 05:40, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

True, i guess with the Arab League category it is kind of redundant.--Yuber

Then do you mind if I delete this category?--Pharos 04:15, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

No problemYuber 04:17, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi! Good to see someone editing more Arab-related topics. Have you checked out ar: yet? - Mustafaa 03:48, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hey, although i speak arabic fluently, i'm not that good at writing or reading. I mean , i know how to work out words phonetically and i know all the letters but i am not proficient enough for something like an encyclopedia :(. Anyways, thanks for your encouragement, i'll continue editing arab-related topic here on the english site :).Yuber 03:58, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I think you have a problem with the article I created called Islamic fascism. If you do perhaps you could discuss it with me. Walkingeagles 06:07, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Discussion forum for Souria.com

Hello Yuber. You mentioned in talk:Syria that their is a heated discussion in the English forums of Souria.com. I tried to find the link, but couldn't. Do you happen to know the address for this exact link? Regards, --Gramaic 02:36, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hey, here is the link to the discussion forums in English

http://www.souria.com/club/sb_forum.asp?forumid=3

Many of the topics got deleted, they were posted by Lebanese people trying to stir up trouble. Register if you want, we need more people on the forum :).Yuber 02:40, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Yuber, I really appreciate it.--Gramaic 03:37, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

False flag revisions

It's debatable whether Irgun was a terrorist organization; I might even be convinced that it was. But the next time you make a change like that and flag it as "minor," I'll report you for vandalism. --Leifern 14:04, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

Categorization is almost always flagged a minor edit, and I think the Deir Yassin massacre proves they were a terrorist organization. The Zionist Terror Organizations category was finally made after a long debate, it's time to start putting it to use in a fair way.Yuber 15:07, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Yuber, this is not the point. The point is that you've made multiple edits, flagged as minor with no description, which actually impact serious issues. I can only conclude that you're doing this to sneak around. Do it again, and I'll be the first to support Leifern's charge of vandalism. Mikeage 23:25, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Once again, I am fairly new to this and I didn't know that a categorization of a group regarded terrorist by almost everyone is not a minor edit.Yuber 04:40, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Yuber, I think you're much smarter than that. I could argue that "almost anyone" thinks that Yasser Arafat was a corrupt, degenerate imposter, but that doesn't give me the right to flag such a categorization (if it existed) as "minor." --Leifern 13:36, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

Islamofascism

Hello. You always keep on asking on the Islamist Terroism page on why this word has anything to do with Islamist Terrorism. I wish for you to read this posting that I wrote on the talk page: "Islamofacism The word has been used in the article before, not as a direct reference to Islamist Terrorism, but as an article of interest of those who want to read up on the entire issues of terrorism. What happened this morning is that a user by the name of Spastika took the word out, called it a POV. I reverted it, since nearly everything he did was reverted because of his possible pro-Arab pov pushing. I am not sure when the word was added to the article, but all I wanted to do is bring it back to a previous version. Zscout370 (talk) 23:13, 4 May 2005 (UTC)"

Basically, all the link there was place there is just for those who are reading the article on Islamist Terrorism might be interested in the debate about Islamofacism. I agree with people that it is a word recently made up and made popular by "right wing nuts" like Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh, but I believe it is a valid link to be put at the end of the article. Plus, as I mentioned before, I was reverting vandalism by a user who was vandalising many pages. Zscout370 (talk) 23:31, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Oh ok, that's fine.Yuber 04:39, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Plus, I know the word is a slur and made up, but I was wondering if you, myself and others can agree to add the link to the article page. Dispite of what I told you and what I said on the talk page, it feels like I might have started an edit war over that word. What can we do to stop this editing war? Zscout370 (talk) 13:44, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Another question: do you think the comments by User:KaintheScion seen to be odd? Though this person has an account since (probably) this weekend, it feels like this person has been here before. The person's first comments were to defame (or attack, depending if the accusations are true or not) User:GraceNote. I do not know if this is getting bad, but if it does, I can have you talk to a few folks. Zscout370 (talk) 16:41, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

It doesn't seem that bad so far, just strange... For a user that just registered yesterday to have all the knowledge of the events of the past few weeks is fishy. He claims he's just a "lurker" that decided to register and get in on things. I don't think anything needs to be done now as he just is trying to argue his POV in the talk page.Yuber 17:02, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

I agree, it is strange. I still think it will be valid to at least mention when the term was coined, the person who coined it, where it was first used, where it is used now and the objections of Muslims. If an article about Judeofascism comes up, I will have no problems with it. Zscout370 (talk) 17:09, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Syria Ribbon

Question, I am wondering why you put that on your user page. I have no problems with it, but I just want to know why you did it. Zscout370 (talk) 18:40, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Just to make my bland user page a bit more aesthetic.Yuber 21:04, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Thats more of a Pan Arab ribbon though, no? same colours as Egypt and iraq, and maybe others (I was always bad at flags!) --Irishpunktom\^talk 20:47, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

Well, the two green stars represent the Syrian version of the Pan-Arab flag. But yes, almost all Arab countries (except for maybe Tunisia and a few other North African ones) share the Pan-Arab colors. Many of them also use Saladin's eagle as their state symbol (Egypt, Iraq, and Syria).Yuber^(talk) 21:46, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Re ChantingFox's reversions

As I gather from his talk page, ChantingFox is fairly new to Wikipedia, and was immediately praised for his work in reverting articles that had been vandalized. He's decided that what you and I see as vandalism is a serious edit and that you and I are the vandals, so he's determined to revert. I've left messages on his talk page. I dunno if I got through to him. Zora 20:58, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Nope, I was wrong. There's another message from ChantingFox on the vandalism alert page, saying that someone is spoofing him, and asking to have this IP blocked. So my initial guess (recorded on his userpage) that there was some skullduggery going on, was proved right after all. Zora 21:01, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

I had a feeling something was strange when his contributions section showed that he only created his account today and already acquired a barnstar after editing a few Islamic related articles..Yuber 21:04, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

From checking the Page History, ChantingFox himself redirected Yuber's user page to douche, then switched it back. I do agree that there have been people who have been impersonating users on Wikipedia, but this edit was not by an imposter. Zscout370 (talk) 21:06, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Please note the difference between my username and his. This user copied my userpage AND talkpage completely, and redirected my userpage to the same one. --Chanting Fox 21:08, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Oh man, please accept my apologizes about that one Chanting. I realized now the same vandal has done the same thing to ClockworkSoul, copying the user page and all. If his IP was blocked, then the vandal must have been using a proxy, which is hard to block. However, a notice on Long Term Alerts on the Vandalism in Progress page should be warrented, since this vandal is causing many problems. Zscout370 (talk) 21:14, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Jizyah

Very nice work on this -- and no small amount of diplomatic skill, I notice.

I have made some minor style edits, hope they are helpful, let me know what you think. BrandonYusufToropov 03:03, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Klonimus and Jayjg were going off interpretations by Ibn Warraq and Bat Ye'or. After their changes, the article basically read like one of those two's books. Thanks for your edits, but Klonimus and Jayjg will probably be back trying to push POVs again.Yuber 03:09, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

I think I recall reading somewhere that there was a community that petitioned the Caliph (or somebody) for the right to pay jizyah -- they wanted protection, in other words. Of course, I don't have the source now. Ring any bells? BrandonYusufToropov 14:59, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

I think it's already in the article, the Christian Arabs that wanted to pay twice the amount of jizyah to express their gratitude. It might have to be made clearer. It seems that Klonimus and Jayjg's editing style is to remove all quotes and examples that might shed a positive light on the actual history to the bottom and put the interpretations from Ibn Warraq and Bat Ye'or to the top.Yuber^(talk) 22:30, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Saudi Arabia

Is there any reason to delete the text in Saudi Arabia, for example I don't find this paragraph POV:

"Highlights of mutaween activities in the news include instances where they prevented women from leaving burning buildings because they did not have proper Islamic headgear on, and numerous instances of religious persecution of non-Muslims for the "crime" of not being Muslim in Saudi Arabia."

since all of it is based on facts. -- Eagle 16:36, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

I hate the mutaween just as much as you do (have family living near dammam), but that paragraph was highly pov. For example, it claimed that the mutaween were found in most muslim countries (the only ones I can think of are Saudi and Iran). It also claimed that the burning building incident was a "highlight", a highlight is usually a good thing. If that paragraph was re-written in more NPOV language, I would see it as useful to the article.Yuber 16:50, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, now it's clear. Though I still believe it would be better if it was rewritten instead of having it deleted. -- Eagle 16:50, May 8, 2005 (UTC)

Vandalizing user pages

Vandalizing the user page of an admin will get you blocked. If you do it again, I will block you. RDsmith4 00:19, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Who are you trying to kid? It's obvious you are an impersonator.Yuber^(talk) 00:20, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Impersonation

Thanks! Any idea whose sockpuppet it might have been? User:Rdsmith4/Sig 01:15, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Go [here] for the latest info on the "impersonator vandal" aka the "doppelganger" Yuber^(talk) 01:40, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

User:KaintheScion

This user has been engaging in POV-pushing on several articles, and upon overviewing his contributions I've noticed that he has also engaged in personal insults against you on several occasions. If you want to file a WP:RFC against him, I would be willing to co-sign it. Firebug 00:22, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Yuber, KaintheScion is entitled to remove messages from his own talk page. Please don't revert him again. Many thanks, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:23, May 9, 2005 (UTC)

Yuber, you're the POV pusher, and stalking my contrib page to revert me is getting really old. Knock it off.KaintheScion

I actually didn't stalk your contrib page, but two of your edits came up on my watchlist. When I went to leave you a message, I saw that your talk page was cleared. So I reverted to the last version (and there is no rule against this).Yuber^(talk) 00:28, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

YOU POV PUSHING REVERT MONKEY

Stop reverting things when you could make edits, you stupid POV-pushing revert monkey.KaintheScion

Kain, stop the personal attacks. That is getting nobody nowhere. Zscout370 (talk) 03:17, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

ZScout, so far I've seen plenty of bad-faith revert pushing and POV pushing - not to mention screaming for references on every single syllable of the edits he's trying to push a POV into - out of Yuber. I've put a notice in the Dhimmi talk but I'm letting him know as well here, if he throws around another revert like that without bothering to explain why in the talk, I'm reporting him for vandalism. ElKabong

That is your call, however, you could have said to please stop the inserting of x,y and z, because we believe this is against NPOV. With the statement by Kain, I just think that was a bit over the top and uncalled for. POV pushing can be handled in several other ways. Zscout370 (talk) 20:03, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

I just want to point out that ElKabong and KaintheScion are the same person, this has been proven by admin jpgordon. I will not respond to either one of them from now on because they are sockpuppets of each other.Yuber^(talk) 14:07, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Ok, Yuber. Is there a discussion of this by jpgordon and others that I can view? Zscout370 (talk) 14:12, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Right hereYuber^(talk) 14:26, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Other than that one thing, I do not see anything much for sockpuppetry. However, give me some time and I could see what I can find. Zscout370 (talk) 14:35, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

RFC against User:KaintheScion

I have opened a RFC against KaintheScion due to his repeated use of personal attacks and false accusations of vandalism. You are free to endorse it if you so choose. Firebug 05:27, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Yeah I just endorsed it, haven't been here the past two days, thanks.Yuber^(talk) 21:19, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Credible sources

Thanks for providing sources for the quotes you insert, but please use more credible source than whatreallyhappened.com. ←Humus sapiens←Talk 07:30, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Most of those sources were Israeli/American and were well-cited, they were not from a "hate-site". You should try to accept the fact that secular/leftist Israelis are quite good sources for revealing what the heroes of Zionism have said over the years. Although those sources might have been from what you consider a "hate site", they were all well-cited in Israeli/American books.Yuber^(talk) 13:26, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

3RR

Yuber, you were reported for 3RR at Golan Heights and, because you've been warned many times about 3RR, I've blocked you for 24 hours. If you feel this is unfair, please feel free to contact me using the "e-mail this user" function on my user page and I'll get straight back to you. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 10:38, May 16, 2005 (UTC)

Yuber, I see you've started editing-by-revert again. We don't have a right to revert each article three times in 24 hours: it's an upper ceiling, but we're not meant to take advantage of it. This post to Jay is the wrong attitude: "Um, please look at the edit history. I made an edit today, then you reverted. Then I reverted, then you reverted. Then I reverted again, then you reverted. You're on three reverts, I'm on two." All that's going to happen is that someone will do an RfC on you, then it could go to the arbcom, where you could be placed on revert parole, blocked from editing certain articles, or blocked entirely for a period. If your edits matter to you, then make them stick by following our policies and making sure you have good sources. And if they don't matter to you, why bother making them in the first place? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 23:33, May 17, 2005 (UTC)

Jay reverted my edits within 3 minutes of when I had made them, perhaps he is the one editing "revert by revert". His claim that I have made 4 reverts and that he has only made 3 is a very shaky one. If you would check the edits you would see the first sentence is sourced.Yuber^(talk) 23:40, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

You were reported for a 3RR violation at Jizyah and have been blocked again for 24 hours. The first edit you made was a revert to a previous version, so it counts as your first revert, not your first edit. Regarding the content and the fact that you supplied a source: violating 3RR gets you blocked even if you're right, and to be honest, I haven't even checked out the content closely, because we're not supposed to take content into account when blocking for 3RR. If in future, you feel your edits are being unfairly deleted (because, for example, they're properly sourced), there are other steps you can take, and I'd be happy to discuss those with you, but you mustn't keep reverting. In addition to the above, you were offered the chance to self-revert. As before, if you feel this block is unfair, please feel free to e-mail me. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 02:11, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

Arab scientists

I have an un-edited list of Arab scientists with a paragraph of biographical description for each. These are neither Persian nor Persian related. And Wikipedia doesnt have these folks listed.

I cant find the time to write an entry for each and put together the list. Im still working on the Persian list. And I have 60 other projects to finish and tend to.

Where do you want me to send this list to? (Or perhaps paste it somewhere?)--Zereshk 21:49, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Resafa

Hello Yaber. Thank you for your message and for letting me know that you have used one of my picture. I went back to Resafa this spring and under this link on my web site you will find frameless pictures of that trip. The one you've selected comes out best on a black background. --Zelidar 18:42, 2005 May 23 (UTC)

Category:Presidents of Syria

Hello Yuber. Since you work a lot with Syrian related articles, I thought you may have some pretty good ideas in how to expand this category. As you can see, the only presidents that are listed are Hafez and Bashar al-Assad. Other Syrian presidents that could be listed, I don't know, maybe Amin al-Hafez, Nur al Din al-Atassi, Nazem al-Qodsi, etc. So, what do think? Regards, --Gramaic 07:44, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

• Note: Yuber, I'm having this category listed as an external link because there seems to be a small technical difficulty when I'm listing it as an internal link. --Gramaic 07:52, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do, there are plenty of articles about Syrian past presidents that should go in that cat.Yuber^(talk) 02:51, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

سفيرق

Never heard of such a surname... Aramaic, maybe? Greek "Spheric"? - Mustafaa 18:06, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Weird... what's the context? - Mustafaa 00:24, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

So it's pronounced Suqayriq? I don't know... maybe Turkish? I'll ask around. - Mustafaa 00:46, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

3RR

You've been blocked for violating the 3RR. --nixie 02:46, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Vandalizing others' user pages

If you vandalize my user page again, I will report you for it. I have given Mel Etitis the same warning. Enviroknot 04:00, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

You have been identified as a sockpuppet by many admins and other respected users.Yuber^(talk) 04:00, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

No, YOU have accused me and your fellow conspirators have followed your lead. You have posted no proof, only vague accusations. That is slander and vandalism.Enviroknot 04:02, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Actually I have seen Yuber accused of sock puppetry.--AI 01:06, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Islam and other religions

Thanks Yuber for the message. I'll appreciate that. Cheers -- Svest 12:36, May 30, 2005 (UTC) ^{Wiki me up™}

It's good to know

Just making sure you are aware of disussions Concerning you. Guy Montag, Humus sapiens and Jayjg (of course) seem to have let you get under their skin. Be aware they intend on reverting everything you do that they disapprove of. See here for details... and here too! --Irishpunktom\^talk 15:02, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

They are also reverting me on articles that have nothing to do with the conflict and that they have no knowledge of. It is getting quite ridiculous and they are making themselves look stupid. Anyways, thanks for pointing those discussions out for me.Yuber^(talk) 15:07, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

User:Enviroknot

I'm out of reverts, so the sockpuppet template will remain deleted unless someone else joins in. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:28, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Does the 3RR rule apply to him on his own userpage as well? At least 3 different editors have kept putting that template back in.Yuber^(talk) 17:37, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

I have reported your vandalism.Enviroknot 20:42, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Khirbat

The word comes from the root خرب, and means "ruin". The Lisan al-Arab defines "kharab" as ضِدُّ العُمْرانِ, the opposite of civilization; in Algerian dialect, خرّب means to make a mess, or destroy. I believe it has a Hebrew cognate "Horvat"; probably Aramaic as well, but I'm not certain offhand. - Mustafaa 17:40, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

According to a book I've been reading, it refers specifically to an extension of a village, built beyond the edge of town. - Mustafaa 16:44, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

3RR

User:Enviroknot has reported you on the mailing list for 3RR at Dhimmi, claiming that you're also editing as User:199.181.178.37. I know of no evidence linking you to this IP address, and so there appears to be no violation. However, I ask you once again to stop reverting so often on so many articles. I protected three pages yesterday as a result of revert wars apparently triggered by you, and if it continues, it's likely that you'll eventually be placed on revert parole or even banned from editing certain articles. I urge you to reconsider your approach. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 23:33, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration Committee case opening

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/KaintheScion et al. has been accepted and is now open. Please bring evidence to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/KaintheScion et al./Evidence. Thank you. -- sannse (talk) 18:41, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Banu Qurayza

Hey, I'd like your input on the Banu Qurayza article. As it stands I believe it to be inherently POV, and containing Factual errors caused by this bias. I have detailed this on the talk page, however, I could easily be missing something, and as you were the one who put up the {{totally disputed}}, I'd like you to point out any errors you also see. Cheers man. --Irishpunktom\^talk 14:58, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

I did some editing and I pointed out some errors/inconsistencies. I will do more when I have the time.Yuber^(talk) 00:11, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Gaza Strip

I take it that you've read the talk page on Gaza Strip and come to a contray decision to everyone else regarding the relevance of the photos you keep reverting in? Josh Parris ✉ 03:09, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Copyright tag

Could you please add source and licensing information (as well as a copyright tag) to Image:New community on the Golan .jpg →Raul654 08:33, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Airports of Palestine

I created this category, and placed the note at the top of the page to inform people of the status of Palestine (not currently a country) as all the other first level categories are countries. Please don't remove it. If you wish to discuss a better note, do that at the top of the talk page. Cheers. Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 09:11, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

Again, please don't unilateral changes to the note. The Gaza Strip and the West Bank are contested, and it is good to mention that. And the link to the airports of Israel is useful due to the above controversy. Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 17:28, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

SomeThing personal??!!!

what do u got against the name Intifada of independence? anything personal? coz i beleive u r nt acting reasonably by removing it every time from the lebanon page; even u dont want it side by side to the name u reclaim to be the best, say "cedar revolution" that is.

"Trafficking in Persons Report 2005"

NPOV would consist of well-referenced information that trafficking in persons is not permitted in Saudi Arabia, that those who engage in trafficking are prosecuted, that victims of trafficking are protected, and that concrete and effective steps are being taken to prevent trafficking. Fred Bauder 15:38, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

Template:Mediterranean

Hi Yuber. I've created polls on Template talk:Mediterranean, so people can vote whether Armenia, and the West Bank can be classified as "Mediterranean." So, I invite you to check out these polls and cast your votes. Thanks, --Gramaic 03:27, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Protection

Yuber, I've just unlocked Jizya, Sea of Galilee, and Dhimmi, which were protected because of revert wars. I'd appreciate it if you could make sure the reverting doesn't start up again, otherwise I'll have to re-protect. Many thanks, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 22:58, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Hey there -- please check out latest edits on Terrorism

I fixed the balanced-example problem people claimed to be concerned about, but POV editors are massing the troops. Could I ask you to take a look and add your thoughts to the discussion? BrandonYusufToropov 01:42, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Similar (but much more longwinded) assaults at Jihad...

... which took several weeks of work to get to an NPOV state. Can you please take a look when you get the chance? BrandonYusufToropov 17:45, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

That seemingly irrational trashing of the redirect on Islamofascism...

... is, I think, our friend KainEnviroScion pulling a Citizen Kane. (Remember the scene where everything gets tossed out the window?) BrandonYusufToropov 19:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

3RR

Hi Yuber, you've been reported again for 3RR violations, as you saw on my talk page. I haven't looked at them carefully yet, but I've glanced at Talk:Jihad. The other user has no right to remove the claim that Enviroknot etc are sockpuppets, but similarly you have no right to remove the claim that someone is an Islamist, which is not itself a personal attack, though I can see why it's taken that way. As for the other material you moved, you should probably just leave it.

You're attracting extremist responses because you're acting in an extreme way yourself. Then you over-react because you're being attacked by sockpuppets, and I completely understand that response, but it's making your situation worse. Please see that this is a dynamic that has to be broken, because it's going to escalate, and if you don't sort out your own role in it, the arbitration committee may do it for you by imposing editing restrictions on you.

Can I suggest you stop editing controversial articles for a period? Your presence around some articles is feeding the sockpuppets and anon IPs. You say on your user page that you have an interest in Syria, and some of the Syria pages could really use some good editing, so maybe you could do that?

If you do make a controversial edit, make sure you have a good source, and stick closely to what that source says. Don't insert any of your own opinions. Read Wikipedia:No original research. Also, don't be so bothered by small details. For example, Operation Litani: you say Israel invaded Lebanon; Guy says attacked. Does the word "invaded" matter so much you have to keep reverting? You could say "Israeli troops attacked and entered Lebanon." Don't get so hung up on certain words. Above all, stop editing-by-revert. You might try imposing a revert parole on yourself: one revert per page per day or something, and see whether it makes a difference to people's responses to you.

If you do all this, and are using good sources, and still find yourself being reverted, ask people for help. I'd probably support you if you were doing all of the above, as would others.

I hope you'll give these suggestions some consideration. I don't want to keep on blocking you. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 22:55, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Also, I want to add that I know it can be very upsetting when you're being undermined about edits you care about. I don't want to give the impression that I think this is an easy thing for you to walk away from. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 23:00, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Enviroknot

You know, the revert war on Enviroknot's userpage has been going on for a few score edits now. Is this really the best way to deal with him? Surely, given some of the horrendous behaviour we've seen from him, there could be an arbcom case filed, or something like that? Ingoolemo ^talk 06:11, 2005 Jun 14 (UTC)

By the way, if your userpage keeps getting vandalised, I'd be happy to protect it for a few days. Ingoolemo ^talk 06:11, 2005 Jun 14 (UTC)

I've protected it. Yuber, let me know when you'd like it to be unlocked. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 08:32, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Palestine

Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Palestine is not being used much. Would you be interested in updating/using it? - Mustafaa 00:06, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Suicide Bombing

Ther has been no "Consensus", Will has pointed out that the entire article is in dire need of an overhaul, so right now I'm not particularly concerned about that small piece. I myself want to bring about a hefty amount of changes, and remove a large amount of unsourced or flatly incorrect statements. I'm going tomorrow, away for a weeks, so i'll see what it's like when i come back, but if it's still the same I will need to serious changes. As it stands there are many paragraphs about Israel, a few words about the Tamil Tigers and almost nothing on the Suicide Bombing in Iraq. There is no mention of the Salafi's role in this, of the wahabbist movements attacks on the four main Sunni Maddhabs, that more Muslims have died as a result of Suicide Bombings than of other religions... oh I could go on. I'm leaving it for a little bit, but removing blatent.. "non-facts" (shall we say). --Irishpunktom\^talk 20:46, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Edit comment on Richard Durbin article

One word for you in regard to that editor: sockpuppet.

What's the protocol for getting guys like that blocked, anyhow? Shem^(talk) 21:18, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hello

Hm, you recently edited Soqotri language with an intent to move all that text elsewhere - it shouldn't be on Wikipedia, as it is directly copied from [1]. Generally, if an anonymous user (or any user, for that matter) inserts a long-winded block of text, and it looks mildly suspicious, run about a sentence into google - often, it's a copyvio and/or plagiarized material. Cheers, – ugen64 00:46, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ah, never mind then. I'll delete it from the page I moved it to.Yuber^(talk) 00:47, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

List of Muslims

You removed Bin Laden and Zarqawi from this list... please don't. They are self-proclaimed Muslims and even if they do not fit into the category under your estimation they do by in people's. We had problems with a "Terrorist" section for that list and a "Militants" section as well... and ever since List of Christian militants was deleted so has the militant section on the Muslims list... therefore they have to go into the others section... gren 05:45, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

personal attacks on suicide bombing talk page

If I were you, I'd just leave them up there. This represents an obvious case of trolling, and I for one am not going to bother to respond to any of Enviroknot's comments if they aren't intended to work towards any version of the article. He just seems to get off on making people angry, and being made aangry himself, so maybe if we try and stop responding, he will calm down a bit. Perhaps my optimism will be ill-founded, hopefully notillWill 17:17, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll just stop responding from now on. But you are being overly optimistic, it's been over 3 months and he hasn't "calmed down".Yuber^(talk) 18:43, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

That long? He's really got some issues then. It's a shame that he vents them here, as it must be more frustrating for him than anybody else (which is saying something). Well, I am at least encouraged that a consensus of sorts was reached between you, Jay, Myself, Tom and Noitall - I get the impression that we are all coming at the issue from very different angles.illWill 18:49, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Proper Editing

I hold no grudges for your role in blocking me or in your past as a serial reverter. I have been encouraged the past couple days that you have refrained from these activities and even made an acceptable edit or two. But I will get very very upset when you do these things: 1. go back to your serial reverting ways, 2. deceptively edit out my edit and call it "minor", 3. entirely edit out my edit without discussing on the talk page first, 4. go onto controversial pages and make wholesale changes, especially when those pages are far outside of your expertise as in christianity. Please honor this reasonable request and we will get along fine. --Noitall 20:56, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Ishmael in Christianity

Hey Yuber, Noitall is correct. Ishmael is not regarded as "the ancestor" of "the Arabs" for a number of reasons that should be pretty obvious. First off, "Arabs" is far more of a linguistic identification than an indicator of common descent. Beyond that, the only claims of descent from Ishmael come from Arab muslim sources, and even those claims deal primarily with the lineage of Islam's prophet Muhammad. These sources are not viewed as authoritative (or even accurate) by most Christian scholars, and therefore form no part of Christian religious philosophy wrt the rôle of Ishmael in the lineage of "the Arabs". While it is probably true that many Christians, especially in Europe, primarily as a result of the 19th century romanticism of various French writers, believe that Ishmael is the patriarch of "the Arabs" analogous to Yitzchaq being a Jewish patriarch, this belief is not, nor has it ever been, any part of Christianity. Tomer ^TALK 00:56, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Toxicity parody

I don't know that it has a name - it's done as sort of a joke cover. I downloaded it off Kazaa myself, from a general search on Tenacious D. -- BDAbramson ^talk 02:59, 2005 Jun 18 (UTC)

• Oops - my mistake! Tenacious D parodied Chop Suey! -- BDAbramson ^talk 19:01, 2005 Jun 22 (UTC)

3RR

You've been reported for a 3RR violation at Abraham and have been blocked from editing for 24 hours. If you feel this block is unfair, feel free to e-mail me using the link on my user page. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 10:42, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

The diffs are here Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR#User:Yuber if you want to check them. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 11:02, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Unwarranted reverts

You did remove my source additions to Ma Malakat Amaynukum without stating reasons at e.g. the Talk Page. --Germen 12:13, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Qana

Yuber, I've left a query for you on Talk:Qana. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 03:31, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks.

Thanks for helping revert vandalism on my user page by enviroknot (aka Kain, Kabong whatever). --Anonymous editor 01:58, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

User:Enviroknot

User:Enviroknot can edit his own user page if he wants. If you have a problem with him editing his own user page, take it to RfC. JYolkowski // talk 01:59, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'd really rather that they didn't, but they'll continue regardless of what I want. Note that there are some others who are removing the template as well. This dispute would probably be helped by an RfC; if no-one opens one before tomorrow, I think I will. JYolkowski // talk 02:06, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Misunderstood?

Man, you are probably one of the most picked on people in many articles. Why is that?

I am strongly against this arbitration thing that some are doing against you, where any defense for you is removed and vandalized by other "anti-Yuber" editors. So far from what I have seen in articles that you edited is that you have a consistent POV (good thing) and you cite your sources. Since I am a high advocate of NPOV, I don't like the antagonization/harassment of specific editors. If you need any help for mediation/support at all in any of the articles, just ask. Hope that helps. --Anonymous editor 03:55, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

You're welcome. Anytime you need help on Islam-related articles especially, I'll mediate/support. --Anonymous editor 04:12, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

Ed Poor has been kind enough to nominate me for an adminship

...which I think will go a long way toward resolving unproductive disputes on pages he and I both edit. Anyone who is interested in voting one way or the other is invited to the discussion here. BrandonYusufToropov 17:08, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Protected

Islamo-fascism is now protected, as is Islamofascism. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 22:50, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

Lebanese

I thought using the word "variety" was more NPOV as you had said before in another article, so that's why I changed dialect to variety.Yuber^(talk) 00:42, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In general I agree, but when there's a relatively high-profile debate as here, I think it's better to mention both sides. - Mustafaa 00:43, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Bosra

hi Yuber

I think you are mixing between biblical Bozrah in Jordan and Bosra in Syria

the capital of Edom is Bozrah in Jordan, as you can read in many other sites:

Bozrah: The modern city of Buseirah preserves the name and location of ancient Bozrah. Bozrah was the ancient capital of the Edomites. The earliest significant remains at Buseireh are from 800 B.C. Bozrah has the largest Iron Age buildings from Transjordan, and it may have been the king’s palace. The city is mentioned in several passages from the prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah (Isa 34:6; 63:1; Jer 49:13,22).

the great Nabatean capital of Petra in all of its rose-red splendor, and Bozrah (modern Buseira), capital of the ancient kingdom of Edom. Both were excellent locations for capital cities, securely protected by natural topographical features and well-situated to control the flow of commerce in the region. Jerusalem University College Current News Update --Urij 08:58, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ancient capital city of Edom 26 miles SSE of the Dead Sea near Petra. An important Edomite strong hold from 1200 to 600 BC, it was the home of Jobab the second known king of Edom. According to the Old Tedstament its destruction was prophesied by Amos and Isaiah ..... (AHSFC)

Bozrah is thought to be a very ancient town, being mentioned in tablets by Thumose the Third and Akhnaten in the 14th century BC. It was one of the first Nabatean cities in the second century BC and in the Hellenistic period it bore the name Bostra. Then the Romans arrived and the King Trajan made it a capital of the state of the Djezire under the name of Nova Trajana Bostra http://ancientneareast.tripod.com/Bostra_Bozrah_Busra.html --Urij 09:02, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

by the way, my mother's birth town called Bosra... --Urij 09:02, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC) --Urij 08:26, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I put my answer in my talk page --Urij 22:00, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Injunction

Yuber, the arbitration committee has issued a temporary injunction against you, so I'm not sure whether you're supposed to be editing. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Yuber/Proposed_decision#Temporary_injunction. I've put a query on Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Yuber/Proposed decision to ask when it starts. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:39, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

The arbcom has confirmed that the injunction has started. Not only are you still editing, but you're still reverting. Please read the injunction: link above. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:33, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

Please stop. Otherwise you may end up getting temporarily blocked. Thanks, JYolkowski // talk 02:08, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Another thing

Just made Wikipedia:Notice board for Palestine-related topics. - Mustafaa 20:33, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration committee decision

The arbitration committee has reached a final decision in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/KaintheScion et al. →Raul654 July 2, 2005 02:29 (UTC)

Other accounts

Could you please tell me whether you have edited Wikipedia under another account. Or anonymously for a period before you created the account Yuber? Fred Bauder July 3, 2005 21:58 (UTC)

You there

Hey, have you disappeared? --Irishpunktom\^talk July 4, 2005 15:01 (UTC)

You're right, Yuber

Wikipedia is heavily biased by viewpoints and interpretations of facts that are excessively favorable to jews and, on the other side of the same coin, Wikipedia is systematically, continually scrubbed 'clean' of viewpoints and factual interpretations that fail the test of favoring jews. It's not at all in your imagination, or in anyone's imagination. It's very real. Maybe we can't change that, but at least we can acknowledge it. For anyone who doubts this, I invite them to just trot on over to the Zionism article, or the article on the USS Liberty, for example.

File:Kataeb.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Kataeb.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the [[Wikipedia:Files for discussion/{{subst:#time:Y F j|-0 days}}#File:Kataeb.jpg|discussion]] to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

I'm only listing this because no article use this image (Kataeb Party promo?) Thuresson 07:52, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Islam poll

[2] I thought you might be interested in this.Farhansher 04:59, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Hey

How's it going being in exile? :)

Are you coming back anytime soon? Salaam, a-n-o-n-y-m 17:35, September 11, 2005 (UTC)

Your RFA

Now is probably the time to check out your RFA. a-n-o-n-y-m 03:27, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Happy Ramadan

Have a very happy Ramadan. Salaam a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 00:10, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Eid Mubarak to you and best wishes. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 01:25, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration case involving you

The Arbitration case centred on Yuber has closed. As a result of this:

• Both you and Guy Montag are each placed on Wikipedia:Probation for one year from the date of closing this case (9th of October, 2005). Should any sysop feel that it is necessary that either you be banned from an article where you are engaged in edit warring, removal of sourced material, POV reorganizations of the article, or any other activity which the user considers disruptive they shall place a template {{Yuber banned}} or {{Guy Montag banned}} as appropriate at the top of the talk page of the article, and notify you here. The template shall include the ending date of the ban (one year from this decision) and a link to Wikipedia:Probation. The template may be removed by any editor, including yourself, at the end of the ban. If you edit an article they are banned from, you will be briefly blocked from editing Wikipedia, for up to a week for repeat offenses.
• You are instructed to use only this account, and no anonymous IPs. What editing constitutes yours is up to any sysop to decide. If you violate this, any sysop is authorised to ban you for up to a week.
• Guy Montag is banned from editing any article related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from the date of closing this case (9th of October, 2005).

Yours,

James F. (talk) 11:40, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Hey

Wellcome back . A lot of stuff is goinon around here . Farhansher 16:35, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Can't believe I forgot to welcome you back. Welcome and see you around. a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 03:37, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Syria

You changed some stuff in the article on Syria that I don't agree with. I believe Turkish is spoken as a first language in parts along the Turkish border among Turkish minorities there, like in Qamishli (although for example Kurdish is a bigger language, and the Turkish minority is small). And the Golan Heights were formally annexed in 1981 by the Begin government, and are now formally part of Israel (according to Israel). Arre 18:31, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, they're not using the word "occupation" either. Regardless of what the government is saying, the Golan Heights are for all intents and purposes annexed: Israeli law has been made the law of the area, and it is in every way treated as part of official Israel; like the Jerusalem Municipal Area but unlike the rest of the West Bank. But of course Begin's comment could be included somewhere. Arre 21:42, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

On the contrary, I meant we should use the word "annexed" just as we use the word "occupied". Begin saying "it's not annexed" right after in fact annexing it, is just paying lip service to international law to avoid condemnation. And that was my point. I just changed the sentence, by the way, to straighten out the language, but I said nothing on annexation. Cheers, Arre 21:54, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Islamophobia

HI . I have added some links to the page . If any of you have time , that article needs to be expanded . With the passage of time , it has been shrunk to nothing. Thanks . Farhansher 01:01, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files so stop your revert war--CltFn 04:22, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Dhimmi

I don't know which is right, only that this is one of the articles you and Heraclius reverted a lot, and it shouldn't start up again. Please go to the talk page and ask there for sources for the passages you disagree with. The sources have to be credible and preferably in the English language. If people can't produce sources within a reasonable time, you can delete the unsourced sections you disagree with, and if they try to restore them, then they will be in the wrong, not you. But if you delete them and replace them with a version of your own, then you have to provide sources too. If everyone sticks to the policies, the disputes will be minimized. See WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, WP:V, and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:55, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi Yuber, thanks for the message. At the moment I don't have access to a library and amn't well enough acquainted with the subject to discuss it off the top of my head (apart from the fact that sources are pretty badly needed to back up whatever's stated here anyway). So while your remarks seem reasonable I'm not really in a position to get involved. I'll be back in Damascus, God and the hijra wa jawazat willing, sometime next week and may be able to do something on it.

I've done some stuff on Syrian topics as well over the past while, you can check my user contributions and see if there is anything there you can improve. All the best, Palmiro | Talk 14:42, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Yuber - please stop vandalizing my edits on the background section of Dhimmi. This is vandalism because you give no reasonable source for your baseless allegation that the dhimma pact is not based upon the Qur'an and Sura 9:29. The Ibn Kathir quotation is given as evidence that Sura 9:29 is the basis in the Qur'an for the dhimma, so it belongs in the background, not in a letter section. Your most recent revert also deleted some the material I had included, without explanation or justification, to remove the references to the Sunna of Muhammad. You are pushing a point of view. Eagleswings 22:49, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Islamic Sceince

Just revert without giving any explanation. If he/she protests, ask her for documentation supporting what she claims. In the case of Muslim science, there is way more than ample evidence to shut up any refuters and naysayers. I have just finished writing a 2500 word essay on the history of Islamic Ophthalmology. I am currently trying to see if I can get it published in a professioanl journal. And I will eventually upload it on Wikipedia, which I think you will find it very beneficial.

What I am saying is this: the more documentation and detail we provide, the less people can come along and insult our cultures. And tyhat's what I am trying to do: flood wikipedia with more than enough evidence that muslims, Arabs, Persians, Turks, and Asians contributed greatly to science, like everyone else did.

I'll try to help out.--Zereshk 05:01, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

---

Minor edits, and more on dhimmis

مرحبا يوبر

may I point out that it looks like you have your preferences set to mark all your edits as minor edits. Since you make quite a lot of edits that aren't minor (and long may you continue to do so), may I suggest you take a look at your "preferences" page and change that?

As for dhimmi, I'm not altogether convinced that it's justified to delete the thing inserted about Ibn Kathir. I agree that your source appears to back you up, but so does his seem to back him up. That means that we need to either: (a) find a strong basis for disregarding it, based on solid sources; or (b) put it properly into context, again based on solid sources, and provide a more solid account of the general views of contemporary Islamologues as well as, preferably, contemporary ulama. I will try to do something on it when I get back to Damascus. I've left a note to roughly that effect on the talk page, feel free to reply there or on my Talk. Palmiro | Talk 14:51, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I am not an expert on Ibn Kahtir, I just wanted to keep the sura 9:29. I think that from a theological point of view, the dhimmi status is justified by this Sura as much as the Omar pact. Both element should be there. Note that the dhimmi status is not exclusive to Sunni Islam, an that Omar represent Sunni Islam only .--equitor 21:18, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I would point out that it's not up to us to decide what in the Quran is the basis for what phenomena of Islam as a religion: the only robust way of finding a link is to see where they are cited as such by Islamic thinkers or persons who actually proposed given actions based on them. Any other approach would be a misunderstanding of what a sacred text really is and its relationship with the religion that claims it (and of course, would also violate WP:NOR ;) Of course, this doesn't rule out citing Ibn Kathir, quite the contrary, but it does rule out us saying "Look, surat 9.29 says X and that is clearly why Y happened". Just a nitpicking remark from a sceptic... Palmiro | Talk 22:14, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Cat for deletion

You might like to take a look at this, which in addition to having me in a state of tooth-grinding fury, sets a pretty bad precedent. Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_October_13#Category:Irish_terrorists Salaamaat, Palmiro | Talk 15:53, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Sockpuppets

Thanks Yuber. I replied to the email. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 23:51, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

مرحبا

Thanks for your message, my name is Hosam and I'm from New York. I wanted to write something about leisure and entertainment (cafes, restaurants, bars etc...) in Damascus, but since i haven't been back in four years, i'm afraid that i'm not up to date. Could you add something on the issue? Also do you happen to have a nice picture of modern Damascus to replace that ugly 80's "rooftops" photo? We don't want to scare the ajaneb away. yalla Salam :) Samosyr

New page on Islamic medicine

Check it out dude. I wrote the thing. Use it everywhere you can!--Zereshk 04:28, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you very much for you know what. ;) --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 19:06, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Atharis

You know more about Islam than I do, but with a little Websurfing ([3], for instance) I concluded that Athari and Ashari are two different movements within Islam. So why did you redirect Atharis to Asharite? Shouldn't Atharis keep their own article? Art LaPella 05:32, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Eid Mubarak

Eid Mubarak and best wishes from my side . F.a.y.^{تبادله خيال /c} 03:50, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

User categorisation

You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Syria page as living in or being associated with Syria. As part of the Wikipedia:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in Syria for instructions. -- Gurch 16:40, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Bellil and CltFn

Hello Yuber, Rhobite, and FayssalF,

There has recently been a conflict over a article, Samira Bellil, that you were involved with, involving user CltFn. I have tried to negotiate a compromise over the article that I believed was fair, but CltFn has rejected part of that compromise (which involved him adding inline and in-text citations to many of his contributions.) I believed the compromise was very fair and that it was strongly consistent with wikipedia rules.

I've been involved with a few recent content disputes over other articles, and both of them were resolved to everyone's satisfaction after lots of work. I really don't have the energy to do it all over again right now. I would appriciate it if you would attempt to find a solution to the problem of NPOV, bias and what I think is anti-Islamic and racist material, that exists in the article any way you can. If you end up having an "official" dispute with CltFn, either about this article or in general, please contact me on my talk page, and I will be happy to provide any comments to any official dispute process. Sdedeo 04:14, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Samira Bellil

Stop your vandalizing of this article. You have not contributed anything to it , and it does not seem like you know anything about the topic. --CltFn 17:52, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Yuber you can start by reading the references at the bottom of the page and learn what this article is all about before you go around blanketing sections you know nothing about--CltFn 18:00, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't care what you think I know or don't know about the topic, because in reality, if this were just a black non-Muslim girl getting raped by other black non-Muslims you wouldn't give an iota of attention to her. So instead of attacking others' viewpoints, we should instead focus on the facts. And the fact is you have broken the 3RR and have done so using multiple IP's. I urge you to accept the compromise version, or you will get a 3RR report filed and be blocked. Yuber(talk) 18:14, 6 November 2005 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:CltFn"

The facts are in the referencs, I hope you find the time to read them, and I have not broken the 3 RRs as you seem to think. I have even made numerous compromises on the article if you had bothered to properly study the history. By the way when are you planning on adding something useful to the article instead of resorting to threats and attacking the messenger--CltFn 18:20, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

The sentence in the article Golan Heights

The sentence says that what is today the Israeli part of the Golan Heights was conquered by Israel in the Six-Day War and again it was conquered by Israel in Yom Kippur War. Toya 20:07, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

I just wanted to thank you for your support of my RfA which finally passed! I greatly appreciate it! Ramallite ^(talk) 04:10, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Golan Heights

In the Hebrew article about the Golan Heights it is written: "The Israeli part of the Heights was conquered from the Syrians in Six Day War and was conquered again in Yom Kippur War." That's why i wrote there what i wrote. Toya 10:38, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

anti-arabism

Added to my watch list. Are we now proposing we remove all of the hatefull quotes from the anitsemetism article I wonder? If you dont want them quoted later on - dont say vile things. Unbehagen 13:10, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

I added it to my watchlist as well, it seems that you have made the most recent edits last I checked. I do have slight problems with that article from both perspectives, and I'll post there if need be. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Ramallite ^(talk) 19:11, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Shaizar

I see that you just uploaded a PD pic of Shaizar. May I ask how you know it is PD? Did you take it yourself, or get permission from the taker, or is it simply a really old picture? --Maru (talk) Contribs 16:04, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Yuber, thanks for your welcome message. I will try to go through them. Whateverdude 09:41, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Syria etc

Yuber, please be careful with the reverting and bear in mind the ruling. History of Syria, Lebanon, and Syrian occupation of Lebanon now protected. Please discuss the issues on the talk pages. Query for you at Talk:Syria. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 04:20, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi, can I ask whether you intend to continue reverting at the above? I'd like to unprotect, but there's no point if I have to re-protect immediately. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:11, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Another Syrian thingie

You might have something to add to the Syrian section on Jewish exodus from Arab lands.

Also, I want to write an article on Saidnayya - feel like a collaboration? Palmiro | Talk 22:50, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Ah, there you are. I'd looked for it in one or two places and didn;t see it. The umpteen possible ways of writing Arabic names in English is a real pain in the wherever. Palmiro | Talk 23:28, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration ruling

Yuber, this is to let you know that I consider you to be in violation of the decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yuber in your editing of Syria, Lebanon, Syrian occupation of Lebanon, History of Syria, and your creation of Israeli occupation of Lebanon, which looked like a violation of WP:POINT. In particular, your revert of History of Syria 40 minutes after I'd unprotected it with an edit summary asking you not to revert was a violation. [4] I've checked with the arbcom and they've confirmed that these articles are covered by their enforcement provision.

If you continue to revert or delete properly sourced and relevant material at these articles, I may enforce the ruling against you. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Yuber#Procedure_for_banning_in_probation_for_Yuber. I don't want to do that, because these are articles that need your input. I understand that you feel frustrated, but please keep on arguing your case on talk, and accept that other editors will inevitably add material that you don't like. All you can do is ask for credible sources, and you should do that, but if they produce a credible source, and if the material is relevant and properly written, you can't delete it. However, you're perfectly entitled to go and look for another credible source that presents an opposing view, and you can add that next to the material you don't like. I'm sorry to write to you like this. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 08:48, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Yuber, I'm serious. If you remove this [5] again, I may ban you from that page. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 06:25, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Islamofascism

Hi there Yuber, my feeling is that it would be a mistake to change article to a redirect to neofascism and religion. "Islamofascism" is different from other forms on neofascism at least in that the term has become a media buzzword and a source of controversy in and of itself. I added a "see main article" link to the Islam section of neofascism and religion. Also, I had a look at the AfD, and the consensus as determined by the closing admin was Keep, rather than merge and redirect. Anyway, thanks for dropping the note, regards, Babajobu 11:53, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, there should be some serious talk about it... and the article should be talked about in a proper manner if it exists and it should be linked based on its importance... meaning, it shouldn't become more prominent than it is. However, last night (at about 1 a.m. EST) I was watching President Bush make a speech in Osan Korea... and he mentioned the term Islamofascism in a context of "radical Islamism, Islamofascism, whatever you want to call it". I don't particularly mind an article... it just has to be done correctly... and that's pointing out what circles teh phrase is popular in... not overemphasizing the tenuous Nazi-Islam links, having proper rebuttals.. Somewhere we need an explanation of Amin al-Husayni's motives going to the Nazis, the backlash, etc.. it wasn't just a great happy story of all Muslims love Nazis... and anything insinuating that is quite silly. Germans (the same happened with Iran) had the distinction of being a real power not tainted by colonial endeavors in the Middle East. The British and French had cut up the Middle East... so, when there's a war brewing... who do you side with? The ones who have hurt your area or the ones that haven't done anything and allow for romantic nationalism. I mean, the complexities, if not glossed over, could make a decent article. But, using User:Klonimus/Islamofascism|klonimus' version would not work since... well, it's not neutral and make normative implications. I guess we'll see how this works out. I saw that Mel reverted it... but, is there any discussion going on? gren グレン 20:07, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't really care if there is an article or not... it's not a very notable phrase but if people insist on having an article than so be it. It is a natural extension of neo-fascism and religion... just, about a specific religion. However, to let the article become a huge POV magnet is the issue and I am, of course, fully opposed to that. Klominus' version is biased in my (and many others') view. I will check up on the debate, but if it comes to be recreated it wouldn't be the end of the world for me... as long as we kept it neutral in all regards. I wasn't arguing that it needs an article, just that it has a certain amoung of prevalence if the president uses it. gren グレン 06:05, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Quit your vandalism

You are just trying to provoke a 3RR situation . read the book for Pete's sake and see for yourself.--CltFn 15:41, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Jewish jurists

Similar to the historians (with some odd switched votes related to cleanup efforts on the underlying article)

Syria

Hi Yuber, in accordance with Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yuber and Wikipedia:Probation, this is to inform you that you are banned from editing Syria for one month from this date for continuing to remove properly sourced and relevant material. You may continue to edit the talk page. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 22:08, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Help

Please vote to redirect Islamofascism to Neofascism and religion...

... which is where it belings. Vote here: [6] BrandonYusufToropov 23:13, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Anti-Arab

Thanks for talking to me. For reasons, see the discussion page. IronDuke 16:32, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

POV in "Anti-Arab" article.

in the article in question, you posted;

In reality this view holds little truth. More than 75% of Arab Americans are in fact Christian, while terrorism is an international phenomenon. The vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists, and victims of terrorist attacks worldwide count many Arabs and Muslims.

Now, i'm not much of a researcher in religion, but you're basically trying to discredit the Islamic faith by saying 75% of Arab Americans are Christian, which just seems immediately fishy. Regardless of what faith you are, i'm quite sure you will have some passages or related matter with regards to temperence and how to treat others. I suggest you follow such materials, and either reference your submissions, or stay well clear of articles you cannot meaningfully contribute to.

Spum 16:58, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Sultanism

Have left a message for you on the Talk:Sultanism page. Regards. WikiSceptic 18:13, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

FYI

I recently had this posted on my talk page, which I thought you might want to be aware of. --HappyCamper 02:46, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Foreign relations of Syria

Yuber, I have received a number of complaints of (and even witnessed) you exhibiting behaviour which has been expressly forbidden by the Arbitration Committee. The most recent incident is at the Foreign relations of Syria article. While it would be perfectly reasonable for me to ban you from editing that article altogether, instead I will give you a final warning to abide by the terms of your probation. I will not be giving further warnings on this subject. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:52, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

This is the behaviour I was talking about; [7] [8]. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:59, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Jihad

Zeno is hopeless, he wants do teach Muslims what they truly belive in. Just give me a call next time there is a need for a well deserved revert. --Striver 00:51, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Be aware, Jayjg and Klonimus are Conspiring against you. --Irishpunktom\^talk 09:55, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Stop your whitewashing

The intro is fully documented , click the links , Your version is not.--CltFn 02:21, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Islamist terrorism

Would you mind trying to continue some sort of discussion on the talk page? These revert wars are not going anywhere anytime soon. JRM · Talk 21:43, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

You can stop being a vandal any day now. There is a talk page discussion that you and your sockpuppets refuse to enter. You'll be reverted until you come to the talk page and present valid points.