User talk:Plot Spoiler

Welcome!

Hello, Plot Spoiler! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Gimme danger (talk) 03:58, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Wiki-Conference New York

It's for everyone! :)--Pharos (talk) 00:42, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Ramallah lynching

Hi ShamWow! In order to move an article, you need to click the Move link at the top of the page and make sure that the box "also move talk page" is checked. However, there's no need to do that now, because 2000 Ramallah lynching is a proper title for this article.

About the assessment: You have done very good work! I am assessing it as C-class for now on the basis of comprehensiveness—there is a whole lot of information about aftermath and reactions, but very little about the actual incident, how it happenned, possible accounts, etc. There is also no information on Israeli investigations into the incident. More text in the reactions section would also be great.

After these issues are addressed, the article will easily be B-class, and you could nominate it for GA as well. Cheers, Ynhockey ^(Talk) 16:18, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! There is no simple way to merge the talk pages; technically I could merge their histories, but AFAIK this is not done for talk pages without a very good reason. Because there are no recent discussions on the Talk:Lynching in Ramallah page, it can just be redirected to the other one, with an explanatory note at the top of the current talk page (see this section, clause 8). Cheers, Ynhockey ^(Talk) 16:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Assessment

Hi ShamWow! The article you mentioned does not fall under the scope of WikiProject Israel. I have also been a strong support from removing the article Yasser Arafat from the project, but there are not enough regular editors to debate this with. I hope it can be done someday. We should be focusing more on articles that don't deal with I–P. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 18:16, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is a known problem that WP Palestine tags are everywhere. We've had discussions about it, but ultimately it's their choice which articles they tag. I always thought that WP Palestine was very political with difficult to understand goals, but so far they have produced at least as many 'native' GAs and FAs as we have, so despite their disruptive tagging they clearly take their project seriously, so I'm not sure we should get into this dispute again and instead focus on actual Israel-related articles. There is absolutely no reason for us to increase the scope of our WikiProject, as we currently have over 3,000 stubs (some of which are top- and high-importance), and hundreds of very bad articles that need work. I only wish the 64 WP Israel participants focused on these tasks more and on I–P disputes and the "Pro-Israel Lobby in the United States" less. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 14:35, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! The Qassam article is start-class. I personally would not like to make it part of our WikiProject, but I am sure there are many users who feel differently. If you strongly believe that it should be, please feel free to add the template and a start-class rating. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 19:53, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AFD

Would you take a look at this terrorism-related AFD. [1] Thank you.Historicist (talk) 00:11, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Patrick Boyd

I already created Raleigh jihad group, although I am certainly willing to reconsider the name. I have not done as much editing lately as I might, but I certainly agree with you that that articles on this topic need work.Historicist (talk) 11:16, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it is a good idea to check this page : [2] from time to time. Editors who work to expunge articles on terrorism from Wikipedia certainly do.Historicist (talk) 11:23, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In other terrorism plots, a page exists for the plot, in addition to separate pages for the more notable individuals involved. Certainly the page on the jihad group needs to be expanded.Historicist (talk) 16:24, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing.

Re [3] and [4].

wp:v: "Material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source. [...] Wikipedia:Verifiability is one of Wikipedia's core content policies. The others are Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Jointly, these policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in Wikipedia articles. [...] The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation."

wp:blp: "Wikipedia articles can affect real people's lives. This gives us an ethical and legal responsibility. Biographical material must be written with the greatest care and attention to verifiability [...] Be very firm about the use of high quality references. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. [...] The burden of evidence for any edit on Wikipedia rests with the person who adds or restores material, and this is especially true for material regarding living persons. Therefore, an editor should be able to demonstrate that such material complies with all Wikipedia content policies and guidelines." -- Jeandré (talk), 2009-08-19t18:05z

RE:Jund Ansar Allah

I usually don't edit these kinds of articles specifically, but I still think it's a start. There should probably be some inclusion of the Hamas reaction (what the politicians said), the reaction from Jund Ansar Allah at the result of the Hamas operation, and if possible the position of the PA in the West Bank. If this is added, I wouldn't oppose upgrading the article to C-class since it's a relatively new group only known for two things: failed attack on Israel and failed declaration of an Islamic emirate. Nice job writing the article Sham, Cheers! --Al Ameer son (talk) 16:27, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sheikh Tamimi

See Talk:Sheikh Taissir Tamimi with concerns related to the lead. --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:14, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Criticism of Human Rights Watch. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. nableezy - 04:52, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Something ought to be done about nableezy's aggressive intimidation tactics and false accusations. Ought he to be reported regularly to administrators?Historicist (talk) 19:34, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Telling somebody they are edit warring after 3 quick reverts is not a false accusation. nableezy - 19:54, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also ShamWow, this message appears to be entirely inconsistent with what we are meant to be doing here. Do you understand that this is not a battleground or does someone need to explain that to you so that you desist from encouraging users to fight ? Sean.hoyland - talk 20:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

André Aciman.

Thanks for the note about the Aciman prod. Please see my reply at Talk:André Aciman#Proposed deletion. -- Jeandré (talk), 2009-09-15t11:09z

Your input at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/André Aciman please. -- Jeandré (talk), 2009-09-16t22:29z

edit warring

on International al-Quds Day. Please stop. nableezy - 02:16, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DTTR, further silliness will be reverted sight unseen. nableezy - 03:03, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

new Terrorism

2009 U.S. Al Qaeda group and Najibullah Zazi - but I haven't much time to work on them just now.Historicist (talk) 00:42, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]