User talk:Shrike

Archives (Index)

2011/March 2011/April 2011/June 2011/July 2011/August 2011/September 2011/December 2012/January 2012/February 2012/March 2012/April 2012/May 2012/June 2012/July 2012/August 2012/September 2012/October 2012/November 2012/December 2013/January 2013/February 2013/April 2013/May 2013/October 2013/December 2014/February 2014/March

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Welcome!

Hello, Shrike, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 20:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Consistency in the IP topic area.

Regarding your comment on the Hasbara fellowships page [1], where you claim that it is undue do report an organisations activities as described on it's own website because no RS have been presented. I am interested to know how you square this with your support for the inclusion of CAMERA and NGO-monitor opinions on the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, despite them not being reported in RS. Dlv999 (talk) 15:42, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

This different if we had some other site that talk about that for example some think tank similar to camera it may be included in the article but what we have now is cherry-picking one item from many other.--Shrike (talk) 15:47, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

First time I've ever seen anyone try to claim it is undue to use an organisation's own website for its wikipedia page. It is not cherry picking, other activities are also mentioned. For some reason you have selected this one activity as a problem to report in the article. Dlv999 (talk) 16:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Because other activities was reported by WP:RS.If not those should be deleted too--Shrike (talk) 16:04, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

CAMERA and NGO monitor are not WP:RS so I hope you will be consistent and remove the material based on posts to their websites which have not been reported by RS from the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions page. Dlv999 (talk) 17:41, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

I already explained to you that Camera and NGO monitor are notable think tanks.--Shrike (talk) 17:44, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

They are activist organisations. Labeling an organisation a "think tank" has nothing to do with any of our policies and could never justify inserting non-notable material into Wikipedia pages. As you have argued, if they are notable on a particular topic they will have been reported by RS. I'm sorry, but I can't have any respect for you if you are not going to apply the policies of the encyclopedia consistently.

Please read WP:NPA.You were already counseled not to make comments on the editors.--Shrike (talk) 17:56, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

"The source is not reliable its clear WP:SPS even if not take in account that its clear agenda site.--Shrike (talk) 17:42, 6 May 2012 (UTC)" and the exact same point applies to material posted on the CAMERA and NGO monitor websites being used in the ICAHD page. In fact Sheizaf's opinion has a better case for inclusion as he is a journalist published in notable mainstream RS, while NGO-monitor and CAMERA are pure agenda organisations. Dlv999 (talk) 18:37, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

But they not SPS not they blog site.--Shrike (talk) 18:40, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Palestine is/is not a sovereign state

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Palestine is/is not a sovereign state". Thank you. –Spesh531, My talk, and External links 20:59, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

As a result of an arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, broadly understood. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad editing restrictions, described here and below.

• Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.
• The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.
• Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.
• Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently WP:AE), or the Committee.

These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.

Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary.

This notice is only effective if given by an uninvolved administrator and logged here.

Just dropping this notice for absolute clarity. Hasteur (talk) 23:10, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Jerusalem 1847

I already wrote about the blood libel at Talk:1847 Jerusalem Pogrom. I don't have Gilbert's book handy, but his version comes mainly from the book of James Finn. You can read the original starting near the end of page 107 here. Zero^talk 12:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Unwarranted accusations

Shrike,

This is the third time now you posted on my page, questioning my behavior in the topic area without good reason. The last time, I specifically asked you not to post allegations to my page but to make the your accusations through the appropriate channels if you have any issues with my edits [2].

With respect to me, you clearly do not have the required objectivity (or authority) needed to stand as Judge and Jury to decide that I have violated the 1RR rules. I vehemently deny that I have done so and I demand that you withdraw your accusations in full, or make a report through the appropriate channels. Dlv999 (talk) 10:54, 9 May 2012 (UTC)