Hi, I now looked you up here as I knew you are on your way to recruitment, and when I started thinking of contributing to some discussions and articles which are under your main interests, I ended up with a severe virus that could have developed to blindness so had to get hospitalized for this whole passing week; everything is fine now. I actually thought you still have some more time left but now see you put the notice about a week ago. So, sorry for myself to miss the opportunity to talk more when you were still very active with your great contributions; at least we got to meet. :) When you want and can, I would love to know here or email how is it going for you and if you got to serve at the section you told me you desire. All the best! Take care. אומנות (talk) 12:31, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, thank you. I am sorry to hear about your eyes and hope everything is ok and will be ok. I was placed in a mixed-infantry-battalion (גדוד חיר מעורב - gdud hir me'orav) called "Lavi", which I will take participation in its establishment. It is not what I wanted, but as of now I am content, I am with very good people and since we are a battalion under establishment, we have a very good staff. I am now on my training which will last for some 16 weeks (tironut 06) so I will obviously be available only for short periods when I go home for friday-saturday, but you can always feel free to send me an Email and I will answer when I can. My Email is Bolter21@walla.com.--Bolter21(talk to me)17:37, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm vary glad and impressed you got a position of a founder-developer for an entire Gdud - no less, and with extensive Tironut of decent and nice people-surrounding. This is so important for enthusiasm and motivation as I learned and see from every major environment as my army experience and Wikipedia; when your duty and more so volunteering tasks feel so much more worth it when you find sincerely cooperative-willing and respectful environment around you. My positioning, as most, was in a long-existing unit under the C4I Corps, maintaining equipment but also lots of guarding and patrols. Although I'm sorry you didn't get your personal most desired positioning within the medical sections, the Gdud will most probably offer vast challenges, and great for your future resume; and לביא is a great name.
I should be completely fine now, the virus caused some temporary small nerve-malfunction along with rash and somewhat burn feel symptoms on the left side of the face for few days. I was lucky enough as usually it causes tremendous pain. After the week-long infusions it should be out of the system so the danger to the nerve-stress on the eye is lifted as well. I even managed eventually to join work trip to the Dead Sea this weekend, with spa and tanning, as another relaxation right after hospital. A good thing also I remember well from the army, is when you also happen to make some duties under the sun, getting some tan and shape. :) Keep enjoying your work with others over there, and try to have a lot of rest as well in between. Will keep writing you on email after some time to check how it goes, and thank you as well for already getting back to me here. אומנות (talk) 10:00, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Bolter21. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Sent some catching up stuff and details about a rapidly coming Wikipedia's tour in the City of David's area, so notifying you here as well in case you look here quicker, hope you manage to come. אומנות (talk) 12:12, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello: request for feedback on proposal for "Palestine-Israel conflict" article
Hello Sinsearach and welcome to Wikipedia. In order to add new content to articles, you need to provide sources to back up whatever knowledge you wish to include. Your thesis, that the conflict has anything to do with Jewish mythology is your thesis, but it is not backed by any serious scholar on the conflict and thus cannot be shown in the article. This is a case of original research, which is discoureged in Wikipedia. Take my advice, it is a mistake many new editors, including myself two years ago, do: if you wish to expend Wikipedia, try to understand Wikipedia first. Instead of bringing your own opinion or ideas, which is something just about every new editor does, especially in the field of the I/P conflict, read some reliable sources written by serious scholars, and use them to expend Wikipedia.--Bolter21(talk to me)15:55, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
hello im muslim...
my solution is u must do the provinci point for food chain conduct through syria and israel.
war always come from:-
1. food chain problem-1st war
2. tax-2nd war
3. maybe coruption political
4. Allahhuallam..
Hi Bolter21, I appreciate you thanking me for my edit to some typos in your comment on page Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Murder_of_Georgios_Tsibouktzakis, but my edit has now been reverted by another user. Apparently it's not acceptable to edit another Wikipedian's comments, even to fix really minor typos. So, you may want to go to that page and edit the comment yourself. Sorry about the confusion. Cheers. -- DavidConrad (talk) 01:33, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Bolter, I'm here to apologize. I saw your revert, and thought you were were reverting the DavidConrad edit I had reverted - so I reverted it, mistaking it for mainspace. Clearly I've been editing too much, and am seeing things. Again, my apologies for the error on my part.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:50, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
absurdly, the word "conspiracy theory" is not even mentioned a single time in the article with proper context. Any word beyond the words written in the article it self is part of a conspiracy theory
That is an extremely peculiar thesis to adopt. Yinon's theory is not a conspiracy, and is not treated as a conspiracy by most of the commentators, like Chomsky, covered in the article. That it fed conspiracy theories is true, but what you are saying, at least in a normal construal of English, is that anyone who might paraphrase the content of Yinon's ideas, from Chomsky to Mordechai Nisan, is,ipso facto, engaged in fear-mongering conspiracy theorizing. I can't believe you meant to state that.Nishidani (talk) 14:38, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No worry. The evidence from Michel Chossudovsky is definitely illustrative of a conspiracy spin. As for Linda S. Heard, I don't know enough about that: but the opinion is usefully cited to show the way Yinon's ideas have been repackaged. Just a small point however. That two people see either a conspiracy or raise that possibility is one thing. To join their respective remarks up and infer from them that they are 'part of a conspiracy (theory)', rather than proponents of the idea of a conspiracy, is another. Sorry for being finicky about language nuances, but you seem to take them on board effortlessly, and your English continues to show excellent progress.Nishidani (talk) 16:45, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest I made the edit and only after I made it I really went through the entire article, so it really changed since the last time I've read it. Anyway, going back from 4 months of boot camp doesn't make you a good reader, so let it be my sign to return to paying attention to things.--Bolter21(talk to me)18:07, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try to continue with the rest of the pages tommorow. Feel free to ping me if that doesn't happen.
Thanks a lot. The thing is, that Ben-Arieh has looked at a lot of the sources I have used, that is Socin, Hartmann, Schick, see User:Huldra/Socin, in addition to 1922 data. By comparing the data we have put into the various Wikipedia articles with what Ben-Arieh gives, we get a second check, if you like, that the Wikipedia data are correct. I do the same with the 1922, 1931 and 1945 data for the pal.rem site, If the data are not similar with the pal.rem site, then I have to do a second check.
Thanks a lot! What is really interesting, is the places that Hütteroth and Abdulfattah has not managed to identify, typically marked with a 7? in User:Huldra/HA, but Ben-Arieh has identified, places like z264 Beit Liqya. This will be very useful..., again, thanks! Huldra (talk) 20:23, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Have you somehow read the content of the article? Apart from the tables it seems to include some minor information about these localities. I found two more articles of his online, one on the Jewish neighborhoods of Jerusalem built in the 19th century, and one on the "twelve largest settlements in Eretz Israel in the 19th century". If it wasn't for the army, maybe I could've expand some articles with them, but if you will want to try your luck with google translate (worked for me a few times with Arabic), here are they: [1][2].--Bolter21(talk to me)20:44, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, I only had Zero who found the article for me. And then RolandR. Anyway, I’m just using it for checking that I got my data right...and identifying more of the Hütteroth and Abdulfattah places, for now. I’m not running out of work any time soon.....Huldra (talk) 21:07, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking at the old GAs and noticed this one near the top. I am willing to review it, but wanted to check your availability first as you have a semi retired banner on your user page. AIRcorn(talk)08:28, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I will be home this weekend and in the next one. Otherwise I am home in every other weekend. I can be active on the phone but with all the limitations that come with it.--Bolter21(talk to me)14:59, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mishmar HaEmek you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aircorn -- Aircorn (talk) 21:01, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia Asian Month 2017: Invitation to Participate
Hello! Last year, you signed up to participate in Wikipedia Asian Month (WAM) 2016 on the English Wikipedia. The event was an international success, with hundreds of editors creating thousands of articles on Asian topics across dozens of different language versions of Wikipedia.
I'd like to invite you to join us for Wikipedia Asian Month 2017, which once again lasts through the month of November. The goal is for users to create new articles on Asian-related content, each at least 3,000 bytes and 300 words in length. Editors who create at least four articles will receive a Wikipedia Asian Month postcard!
Also be sure to check out the Wikipedia Asian Art Month affiliate event - creating articles on Asian art topics can get you a Metropolitan Museum of Art postcard!
If you're interested, please sign up here for the English Wikipedia. If you are interested in also working on other language editions of Wikipedia, please visit the meta page to see other participating projects. If you have any questions, please visit our talk page.
This will be the last message you receive from the English Wikipedia WAM team for being a 2016 participant. If you sign up for WAM 2017, you will continue receiving periodic updates on the 2017 event.
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!
Hello, Bolter21. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Mishmar HaEmek, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:09, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to Donald Trump I've speant more than two weeks in my base. Now I came back to a three day vaccation which started yesterday. Usually being one of the most unlucky people I know, I came back and found out my computer's ancient hard-drives died, so I am using my dad's leptop. I don't know if I will have a new computer until the next time I'll be home so contacting me may be tricky. I can only use my phone.--Bolter21(talk to me)08:48, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Al-Aqsa riots (2015), a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.
You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Magdala, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Menorah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
with this you broke 1rr in relation to previous removals. The excision of the Israeli side's response from the lede is shockingly POV.Icewhiz (talk) 09:54, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Accusing an Israeli fighter of anti-Israeli POV is funny. It is not 1RR, since I didn't revert anything. There's a clear difference between removing information and reverting an edit.--Bolter21(talk to me)10:26, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Never said you were an anti-anything. Removal of information entered fairly recently by other editors is a revert - you are undoing their actions.Icewhiz (talk) 10:39, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, You said I removed Israel's response from the lead (which is a lie), and that it is "shockingly POV", which implies my edits are anti-Israeli. Second of all, a revert, according to WP:1RR is to undo the action of another editor, which I didn't. The main thing I removed was an entire paragraph talking only about 30 March. Other than that I mostly summarized and merged other paragraphs together to shorten the lead. I didn't remove Israel's response, I just took the paragraph on Israel's claim and added it in the end of the second and main paragraph. I removed the information from the Israeli NGO because it was outdated. Don't rush to accuse other users of reverts when they don't actually use the revert tool, and moreover, don't recklessly blame users of any POV, especially when they put their lives at risk countless times for the side you imply they are against in their edits.--Bolter21(talk to me)10:59, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Bolter21 - I do appreciate your efforts both in the field and to improve Wikipedia. As for what constitutes a revert - I (and I think policy) disagrees - however I shall not be pursuing this further - I was hoping to get you to self-revert the Israeli response back in (which I think is DUE for the lede given there are all sorts of other responses and a description of the Gazan narrative) - however - it seems I was too aggressive. Shavua Tov.Icewhiz (talk) 20:24, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A page you started (Deir Hajla) has been reviewed!
...it is completely messed up. Socin didn't deal with villages that far north in his 1879 paper; in fact, by the data it seems as if they have copied from Beit Fajjar (!!) Huldra (talk) 22:53, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I have no opinion (or knowledge) on the correct title of the page, but if you want to move a page and can't because the new title requires an admin to do it, please use the Wikipedia:Requested moves process if it is a controversial move (which probably anything having to do with Israel/Palestine is). If the move is completely non-controversial (spelling mistake, obvious WP:MOS error), you can tag the target page with {{db-move}} so that an administrator can either perform the move for you or at least delete the target page. I deleted the 1948 Palestine war/ page and fixed the 1948 Palestine war redirect to go to the current location of the article. Again, I have no knowledge of what the correct title should be and am not taking sides - just cleaning up what was broken. --B (talk) 12:45, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Bolter21. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tel Qiri, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Assyrian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
Bolter21, it's been over a month since I commented on this nomination that it was probably time to close it, and the nominator has still not edited Wikipedia since January and has never addressed your review, which has been open for 99 days.
At this point, given the complete lack of response, it's time for the review to be closed. You can, of course, disagree with me on this point, but I'll assume the review is abandoned if I don't hear from you within the standard seven days (though I'll certainly wait for you to see this if you haven't edited between now and then). Unless I hear otherwise, I'll close it as unsuccessful after the time has elapsed. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:07, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@BlueMoonset:@Bolter21: Aaargh! I'm so sorry that I missed this. (I was spending what Wiki time I had on Commons. I got my first featured picture!) I've addressed the obvious copyvios and started to expand the history section as suggested. I'll keep working on it over the coming week in particular. If it's possible to reopen the GA nomination, I'd really appreciate it, but I understand if I need to go to the back of the queue because I dropped the ball here. Thank you very much for the review, and I'll continue following up with the various items regardless. grendel|khan04:11, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
User:Grendelkhan, I'm afraid it won't be possible to reopen the nomination; you'll have to nominate it afresh. However, it may be that Bolter21 would be willing to review the new nomination so it doesn't have to wait to find a reviewer. (Or maybe not.) Best of luck with this going forward. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:06, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On 25 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tel Qiri, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that hints of female discrimination in biblical times were discovered in an ancient Persian cemetery excavated from Tel Qiri in northern Israel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tel Qiri. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Tel Qiri), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Aren’t IP editors allowed to use the talk page under 300/50? The IP’s comments looked a little odd but I don’t think they were disruptive. Onceinawhile (talk) 18:15, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Once. First of all, The amendment states: "Editors who are not eligible to be extended-confirmed may use the Talk: namespace to post constructive comments and make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive. Talk pages where disruption occurs may be managed by any of the above methods. This exception does not apply to other internal project discussions such as AfDs, WikiProjects, noticeboard discussions, etc.", so we can choose to censor the votes of IP users. Second of all, do we really want to allow new editors to participate in this crucial move? I tend to distrust new editors, which is not a virtue in general, but within the workspace of the I/P conflict this may be required. This editor's intentions are not too clear, as he says he supports "War in Palestine" per sources, and suggests that "1948 Arab-Israel" is pov pushing and therefore "support ban of whoever votes this for pov-pushing" (me included -_-). In a comment he made in the previous thread he lectured on what WP:Neutrality means. I don't think an anonymous editor with less than 10 edits is eligible to contribute to this discussion. Per WP:Canvass I cannot ask to only allow involved editors to comment (such as Huldra, Zero0000, Nishidani, Ynhockey, Davidbena etc.), but at least let it be editors who have managed to make enough edits without being banned for being disruptive to participate in this discussion, which should end a decade long debate on one of the most important articles in Wikipedia which effects thousands of BA and MA students around the globe daily (who use Wikipedia without their professor's permission).--Bolter21(talk to me)18:35, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If this attempt fails to find consensus (on anything, including consensus for status quo), I propose we wait for 2–3 months and then try again with the same table, but this time instead of asking for support/oppose, we ask people to rank their choices in order of preference. We might find that the majority of us who support consistent titles are then more willing to compromise on what the exact title should be as a price for consistency. Also pinging @Icewhiz: for his views. Onceinawhile (talk) 14:55, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'd probably give a rest for longer if it fails (unless it seems there is an immediate compromise version that it is possible to !vote on immediately forming through the discussion). Not because I think the move is wrong (I agree that the current title scheme is broken), but since I think there is fatigue against actually discussing it - which means there is pushback at actually discussing it. Icewhiz (talk) 14:58, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
e.g. - If there is some semblance of a majority for 2a+2b+2c+2d over 1 (status quo), I would try to caucus 2a/b/c/d !votes to see if they support the leading 2 option over 1 - in which case this would be an immediate and quick follow-on !vote. But if that doesn't seem to be in the cards - I'd hold off for at least a year. Icewhiz (talk) 15:16, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to agree with Icewhiz. I feel like me and Onceinawhile are eager to see this issue solved, but most other editors are apathetic about it, especially after seeing the monstrosity that is the actual discussion. I understand Onceinawhile's rationale for the better voting system but sadly I believe since humans are monkeys after all, it is going to be difficult to draw many users to a new discussion (which is also why we would have to hold off for a while should this fail.
With that said, we still have the obligation to scan 1948 related articles and modify the links and wording so we could route our readers where they need. People go here out of innocent ignorance.
One of the reasons I wanted to see the change is as a first step to make some order and have the three articles correspond with each other and act like a trilogy and not three distinct articles with possible contradicting facts, leaning towards POV, unneccessary repeated information, different language and style etc.
Point is, there is more practical work to do other than solving the title issue.
Editing articles about Archaeology is fun but I kinda' miss the drama in the talk pages and the reports at ANI and after spending two years in the West Bank I am a bit tired of contemporary politics so that could be a new hobby.--Bolter21(talk to me)05:52, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tel Yokneam you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ganesha811 -- Ganesha811 (talk) 17:01, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Ganesha811. I really appreciate your will to spare some time to review this article which I've personally worked on a lot. Let me inform you that my current occupation gives me access to my own computer only every two weeks and in the mean time I mostly use my phone, so my response to the review might be a bit slower. It would be best if you ping me with every comment, I check my watchlist several times a day.--Bolter21(talk to me)14:34, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Perhaps you would like to put Tegart's Wall on your to-do list. At the moment it is in bad shape, with some nonsense statements such as that it was on the border (look at the map which I made to see how much was left on the other side). I'd fix it myself except that some of the best sources are in Hebrew and that takes me too long to decipher. For example this and this. Of course I'll help as much as I can. Zerotalk13:30, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, sounds good. At the moment I still deal with Tel Yokneam and preparing up a personal project on Tel Aviv's archaeological sites (as a way to introduce more readers to Israeli archaeology). On the 28th, this month, I will be free of IDF occupation so I guess that's the right time to check into the Tegeat's Wall, which I'll be happy to do.--Bolter21(talk to me)13:01, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks man. This whole are doesn't only suffer from lack of coverage in Wikipedia, but also from a lack of attention from Israel. Tell Jemmeh is strictly a Goy site. Same goes fr Tell al-Ajjul and Tell al-Farah south. THese are Canaanite city states and later Philistine towns. They matter more to the broad understanding of the Near East but not to Jewish history. The Palestinians are too dumb to realize the historic potential of these sites and those who fell behind the Egyptian front line are casually flattened and sometimes for military bases.--Bolter21(talk to me)19:26, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bolter21, thanks for your significant improvements to En Esur, where you "dug deep" to find older sources, and worked to produce informative images, all greatly benefitting readers hoping to learn more about this archaeological site. Keep up the good work! Darouet (talk) 20:21, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Bolter21 - Just letting you know that I've accepted your WP:GOCE/REQ request to copy edit Tel Yokneam.
Please don't hesitate to get in touch if you have any questions or comments on any copy editing choices. I'll ask here if I have any questions myself!
Regards - FiveFaintFootprints (talk) 17:30, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again. The copy edit is going well - nearly finished!
One detail I'd like to clarify is this sentence in the Geography section: "The top of the mound slopes steeply from south to north."
Which way does the slope run: up, or down? I would like to change it to read "from north to south", which is the more natural phrasing. Does the top of the mound slope downwards towards the north (as I suppose) or upwards? Depending on your answer I would suggest writing, "The top of the mound slopes steeply upwards/downwards from north to south," or else "The steep upward [/downward] slope from north to south at the top of the mound led ancient Yokneam's builders..."
The peak of the mound is in the southern part. The slope goes down from south to north (technically from southwest to northeast but that's WP:OR). Is this enough to solve the issue (I am in a hurry right now).--Bolter21(talk to me)18:52, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Copy edit complete. I think you've done a fantastic job on this article, and put in a huge amount of work. I'm really hoping to see it get through its renomination and go up as a GA soon! Let me know if you'd like me to check over any modifications at any point. Regards - FiveFaintFootprints (talk) 22:25, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks man I really appreciate it and also your help with the DYK thing. I guess I'll check the copy edits when I'll be home next Thursday to make sure no information was lost or modified in the process.--Bolter21(talk to me)07:46, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Finished 32 months of military service in the Israeli Defense Forces. A total of 22 months were spent in the West Bank, of them, 16 months were spent on operational activity (i.e. patrols, checkpoints, arrests, riot dispersal, guarding and more). I've been inside Area A numerous times and on rare occasions in daylight. I've had an encounter with probably more than 2,000 individual Palestinian citizens, including Bedouins, farmers, residents of refugee camps, businessmen, lawyers, doctors, members of terrorist organizations and Shin Bet collaborators. I've met a few hundred children of all ages and elders of all kinds. I've been to Jericho, Jordan Valley, and the northern Dead Sea for the most time, but I've also spent time in eastern Hebron, outskirts of Nablus, Ramallah and spent a week overlooking Gaza City.
Conclusions: Israeli soldiers are the most humane being in the West Bank. They are true victims of the conflict. It is a psychological thing. Physical harm is not taken to account here. They are not regarded as such by the Israelis, by the Palestinians or by themselves. The first step for Israel to face the Palestinian problem is to realize the human cost of putting innocent 18-year-old boys and girls in such an environment and giving them vague authorities and sending them to complete tasks they don't understand. They have no freedom and no rights and this is allowed simply because they know it will end after a limited period. They are trapped between their commanders (me included), the settlers, the Palestinians and their friends. The IDF has no agenda, no opinions, no policies. It is a mess. The officers are mostly dumber than most people. They may be more intelligent and have more motivation to act, but they don't understand humans truly. The conscripted army is an outdated system and it takes people with innocent thoughts and poisons them. Indeed it has more benefits to the participants, but I am not here to talk about the benefits. It would be better to have the settlers and Palestinians deal with themselves alone, no matter how brutal this might be. It would be better to build a 200-meter high wall if needed atop of the imaginary Green Line, and say goodbye. If not, the only two other options would be: putting the Palestinian society under the sovereignty of Israel, and no other than, Israel, the Jewish state, for now at least. As for the other option, I warn readers that it might be taken out of context, so this is not a hate speech or a call for violence. The most absolute solution to the conflict is genocide, no matter which side faces it. It seems that humans here are not ready to live together. Maybe waiting for another two, three or four generations will change something, but how long can we wait? How long can the Palestinians live stateless in such an atmosphere of hate? How long could the deteriorating Jewish democracy survive? This question is too difficult and scary to answer. History on a broad scale shows that humans might face horrible realities, but we were raised on a nice period. So far, only about 25,000 people were killed in the violence between the Israelis and Palestinians, not counting Lebanon. Will the numbers begin to rise as the value of human life will fall? Will the murderous hate speech of the 1990s will be considered polite in comparison to what the future holds? I don't know. I don't want to know.
Here is one of the most climactic events in my service. It is not directly connected to the conclusions above but it set the tone for the last two weeks of my service. I was on patrol with two young soldiers and had to fight everyone who is on my side: my officer, my company commander, the Israeli Civil Administration, the Israeli police and a few settlers. I began a routine patrol on the Jordanian border and then ordered the driver to stop at a Palestinian salt factory next to the Dead Sea. Told a random man "Marhaba ya zalame", to which he replied "Shalom Gever". I asked "Ma'ak kadaha minfadlak?" and he simply turned around, rushed to his backpack and pulled a lighter and two Camel cigarettes and said "bevakasha hayyal". I borrowed the former and politely refused the latter as I already held a cigarette in my hand. While an Israeli-bedouin in IDF uniform was examining the border, looking for footprints I was inhaling nicotine thanks to this random man. This Palestinian man, I thought, is much more likely to be shot dead by me, than any of the other people who annoyed me that day, simply because of our national allegiance my current occupation.
Bonus conclusion: I sincerely thinking about starting a campaign for Tel Avivian independence. If anyone has any connection to the Rothschild family please contact me.--Bolter21(talk to me)14:09, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hi! I just wanted to let you know that my GA review of Mishmar HaEmek is coming along - and there are a few issues that need a response from you as nominator. My apologies that the review has been slow - but it should be wrapping up in a few days. Hopefully we can get this one passed together with some work. Thanks! Ganesha811 (talk) 22:03, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On 11 December 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tell Qudadi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Tell Qudadi, a buried Iron Age era fortress, was unknowingly used as the site of a military stronghold during World War I? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tell Qudadi. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Tell Qudadi), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hey Bolter21, thanks for answering some of the comments. I'm still waiting on if that last comment of mine is going to be addressed. --Tenryuu (🐲 • 💬 • 🌟) 01:23, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Bolter21:, I've changed the status of the copyedit review to complete as shown above. Let me know if you would like anything else on this article to be reviewed, but I'll be marking your request at GOCE as completed. --Tenryuu (🐲 • 💬 • 🌟) 06:24, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. Thank you very much for the review. There is a GA nomination going on right now. Should I add more information could I personally ask you to check the new content for copyeditting? Shouldn't be something too big, the article is mostly complete.--Bolter21(talk to me)09:34, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, for the comment you made about elaborating on the situation that worsened in 1929, I couldn't find proper information. Some primary sources (history book based on members' memories) just state that the attacks increased.--Bolter21(talk to me)09:36, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Took a brief look at the extra bit you added and tweaked it a little. I'll see if I can add anything for the 1929 thing. --Tenryuu (🐲 • 💬 • 🌟) 21:02, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"a militant is a member of a militia" --- no, that's not right. My dictionary has it right: a militant is a militant person, where the adjective militant means "combative and aggressive in support of a political or social cause, and typically favoring extreme, violent, or confrontational methods". It isn't about militias. Zerotalk00:06, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Zero0000: Alright. My dictionary says otherwise, but my dictionary was written by the descendants of Shem while your dictionary was written by decendents of Japheth so I'll give it to you. Feel free to revert I am on my phone. on--188.64.206.49 (talk) 07:00, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, pings only operate if you save a signature in the same edit. I think they are part of the processing of ~~~~. Zerotalk12:59, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DABBEŠETH en Zabulon, Jos. XIX, 11. Le Kh. Dabsé près de Teir Šiḥa proposé par Conder est hors du cadre de la tribu strictement conçu ; mais on sait qu’entre le découpage et la liste des villes il y a plus d’une fois des tiraillements. En vertu de la rédaction finale, le contexte demanderait un des tells de la grande plaine en face de Tell Qaimūn avec forme de bosse, car tel est le sens de dabbešeth, par ex. le Tell eš-Šemmām. Zerotalk00:08, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This Huldra person didn’t like these mass changes, and it was decided I should try an “RFC”. Unfortunately, I’ve read the article for how to make an RFC numerous times and still can’t figure it out...can you put the information in the Wikipedia link above into an RFC form for me? And if so, send me a link to the RFC...any help you can help offer is much appreciated, thank you very much Zarcademan123456 (talk) 22:31, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
An "RFC" is a request from an editor for the comments of other editors. It can be used for many things, but in your case, you will use RFC when after a very long discussion you and your colleagues have failed to agree on how things should be written in the article, but simply cannot accept either the current form or the form that the other person offers. An example was that once we had an RFC about the lead section of the State of Palestine article because we couldn't get a consensus. We also had a failed RFC for the title of the 1948 Palestine War article, which then turned into an RFC on different approaches in how to split the topic into primary and secondary articles. I don't advise using it because it takes much time and effort and sometimes leads to even worse debates. I would otherwise advise to base your comments and debase other people's comments with sources, rather than with opinions, logics and original research.
But as you asked, a fellow Wikipedian, in order to start an RFC all you have to do is start a new section in the article's talk page and below the section header insert {{rfc|hist}} (if it has to do with history) or {{rfc|pol}} if it has to do with politics, government and law. You can see all categories in WP:RFCCAT. Once you do that, people will see your request and kind people will offer their opinion to help solve the dispute. You better read Wikipedia:Writing requests for comment so your RFC will be taken seriously.--Bolter21(talk to me)23:06, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, Wikipedia talkpages are transparent and every user can read them. So calling users "This Huldra person" in talkpages they might follow would just make your workspace more toxic.--Bolter21(talk to me)23:09, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think I have a solution to the History of Israel / History of Palestine discussion.
We write a combined text from pre-history to 1948 (or 1917), and transclude it into both articles. This way we can still have a "History of Palestine" article and a "History of Israel" article , but we ensure most of the text is the same.
Oncenawhile It doesn't sound good. Have two articles with different titles but the same information? If I want to write an article about the Bronze Age here, would it be part of the History of Israel or the History of Palestine? Either way, I start to think a consensus won't be achieved, so we better start working on these two articles with what we have. History of Palestine already serves as a possible framework for the history of the land, only the lead section need to define the scope of the article and introduce all narratives and approaches and from there onward use the word "Palestine" or "Israel" to refer to the land as few times as possible. In my userbox, there's a draft for what I envision the article's structure. Seeing it is clearly very big I figure out it would mean there will be many other articles branching off. User:Bolter21/sandbox#History_of_Israel_and_Palestine. I think such information can already be added to the History of Palestine article after some cleanup will be done there.--Bolter21(talk to me)11:05, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there. This is an invitation to join the 50,000 Destubbing Challenge Focus of the Week. £250 (c. $310) is being given away in May, June and July with £20 worth of prizes to give away every week for most articles destubbed. Each week there is a different region of focus, including one week dedicated to South-South East Asia, though half the prize will still be rewarded for articles on any subject. There's a potential £120 to be won in total for destubbing on any subject or region of your choice. Sign up if you want to contribute at least one of the weeks or support the idea! † Encyclopædius11:40, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. Makes sense. I guess I'll be branded an enemy of the Jewish people again. By the way this isn't the first time I've received emails from a banned user so I suggest blocking all sockpuppets from sending Emails.--Bolter21(talk to me)20:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'll take a look. Also, let's try to remain calm on the Ain Jalut discussion. I don't see how any administrator is going to accept the existence of a separate article for Ain Jalut.--Bolter21(talk to me)12:45, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Bolter just a heads up, the Well of Harod page was recently moved and the talk page thread you just posted about sources was posted to the redirect talk page and not the article talk page. Just FYI. Cheers, Levivich[dubious – discuss]16:11, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
On 10 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tel Zeton, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the name "Hashub", mentioned in the Hebrew Bible in the Book of Nehemiah, was found on a piece of pottery contemporary to Nehemiah at the archaeological site of Tel Zeton, Israel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tel Zeton. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Tel Zeton), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Some have similar name as the nearest Lebanese village/city, some have (to me) totally unknown names. E.g., would you happen to know where "Rayhan military post" is (or rather: was)? Huldra (talk) 23:21, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Huldra. The Rihan outpost was the northernmost outpost of the IDF, located on the edge of the ridge on which the village Al Rihan lies. The Hebrew article places it in 35.573195 - 33.444735. I have confirmed this location thanks to many photos I've found on the web of and from the outpost. About 450 meters to the south there was an SLA outpost, whose location appear in a Kan doccumantery about the outpost has a detailed map of the site, but I think it only shows the SLA post. If you are willing to use Youtube's auto-translated captions which are decent at best, here's a link.--Bolter21(talk to me)10:15, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Nabi outpost doesn't have coordinates, but based on this map, I believe it is located on the highest peak west of Metula, between the villages of Aadaisse and Kafr Kila.
And yes I meant the Israeli Public Broadcasting Corporation. I don't know why I was very confident you know it and why it didn't occur to me there is more than one "Kan" in the world.--Bolter21(talk to me)20:49, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Hebrew article refers to "breaching a path" which is a practice done by combat engineering units, creating a path for military vehicles. I think a large portion the roads in southern Lebanon were paved by Israeli engineering units cause the IDF really liked doing that.
All of the above links I provided were the permanent IDF outposts in SL.
The coordinates of Hamama were hidden in the code: 33.286958|35.587580
Tel Qab'a is supposedly an archaeological mound, but it was also an IDF outpost located at 33.227384|35.525358
According to Hebrew article, the Nabi outpost operated by a signle platoon and served as reinforcements for Galgalit. Have no idea if it has any pictures. The Hebrew Wikipedia provides a picture of a road and a truck but I don't know what is exactly the relation of this picture to the actual outpost.--Bolter21(talk to me)13:05, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So is that article about the Rayhan military post, in Lebanon, or is it about the so-called "breaching a path" -practice? Huldra (talk) 21:11, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is about breaching a path. this is the article about the Reyhan outpost. The picture in the breaching a path article shows engineering vehicles and a tank breaching a path between Aishiya and Reyhan.--Bolter21(talk to me)11:02, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I humbly accept your offer! My edits have in the past been called pro-Palestinian and could certainly use some balancing. My project this week have been to add content to the "2015-2016 wave of" article and related articles to make a readable narrative, trying to explain both sides fairly. ImTheIP (talk) 15:23, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ImTheIP I'll try to look at this article again even though I was fed up with it a long time ago. I suppose the best thing I can do is review your edits and see what I can contribute in relation to them if they are considered pro-Palestinian (even though half of the "pro-Israeli" edittors here see me as a "pro-Palestinian", but on the same time the "pro-Palestinians" view me as "pro-Israeli").--Bolter21(talk to me)16:36, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
I find it fascinating that we can't get an agreement on something so simple. To my mind the only way this conflict gets solved is if the narratives start to align. I still can't get my head around why that is such a difficult thing to achieve. Onceinawhile (talk) 12:08, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect that our motives are mostly archaeological and historiographic, but the rest are too stubborn about the narratives. If I proposed the same technical merge to a Hebrew-speaking audience, I would probably have rotten tomatoes flying towards my face because it is a complete betrayal the Zionist narrative and the justifications would be perceived as surrendering to Palestinian terrorism. It seems that for most people the subtext is more important than the content and the purpose of historiography is to support the narratives of the present. The separation of history from politics is impossible. Maybe it is an illusion to think that it is possible to normalize relations between the Israeli and Palestinian land narratives when there is no peace between the actual nations.
I have created a vision in my sandbox when I was much more optimistic about this merge. I believe with the help of informed and talented editors we can create an unprecedented work about the land's history that is in the public domain for all English speakers and might spill over to the rest of the languages since most of the Wikipedias copy content from the English Wikipedia.
It may have been a mistake to try and merge the templates like that. There should be a history of Israel and the history of Palestine, but referring only to the modern nations. It makes sense that the users will oppose the merging of two narratives. I also have no confidence that the users will accept the presence of three narratives, one Palestinian, one Israeli, and one historical-geographic. The current situation is too fitting, despite how ridiculous it is. The same can be said about the situation in the West Bank, or maybe it is time to stop romanticizing this online debate with an ethnic conflict.--Bolter21(talk to me)13:19, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Very well said. Lots to mull over. I believe it is possible, but need to find a way to address the challenges that you very neatly summarized. Onceinawhile (talk) 14:08, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Onceinawhile I am thinking about a solution. Right now I think that maybe History of Palestine should be dedicated to the history of the land, History of Israel would move to History of the State of Israel and most of the pre-Zionism content will be merged into History of Palestine and History of the Jews and Judaism in the Land of Israel. In order for this to be done, the lead section of History of Palestine must be clear in stating that roughly Palestine = Land of Israel = Holy Land and thus remove some of the stress. It would mention right away, that "Palestine" is popularized in European texts and that the title is used by Israeli-Zionist scholars to refer to what they refer to in Hebrew as "Eretz Yisrael", and that the article brings the anthropological, historical, geographic and political research of land, and not a people or a nation. Both the modern Israeli and Palestinian nations will be mentioned in the article. But I don't suggest this right away. I think that I need to first read through all of the articles on the subject to suggest a broader change. And maybe if we get a consensus, we should create a task force to doccument the history of the land. It seems that ImTheIP is keen on doing that already in the History of Palestine article.--Bolter21(talk to me)21:00, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello :)
I am writing my MA dissertation on Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and I noticed that you have contributed to those pages. My dissertation will look at the process of collaborative knowledge production on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the effect it has on bias in the articles. This will involve understanding the profiles and motivations of editors, contention/controversy and dispute resolution in the talk pages, and bias in the final article.
For more information, you can check out my meta-wiki research page or my user page, where I will be posting my findings when I am done.
I would greatly appreciate if you could take 5 minutes to fill out this quick surveybefore 8 August 2021.
Participation in this survey is entirely voluntary and anonymous. There are no foreseeable risks nor benefits to you associated with this project.
Hi @Bolter21:. Do you think that you can help us rewrite the lead paragraph in the Wikipedia article City of David? As you can see here, the lead paragraph does not accurately portray a summarization of the article, based on Wikipedia policies. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section calls for the lead section to summarize the content of the article using 4 or 5 paragraphs Thanks.Davidbena (talk) 14:31, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Darren.enlight apologies for not replying. I am not too active in recent weeks. How can I help you?
No worries, I get it, we all have lives outside the internet. Thank you for getting back to me! I was reading about the whole case of the research into Tantura and as part of that, I had a look at the Ilan Pappe page on Wiki. I found a statement that was in need of a citation and I had one for it, and I also found a quote from him that seemed relevant to assessing Pappe's work as a historian, since there's a section dealing with that on his page. I wasn't aware that I don't meet the requirements of seniority to edit that page, so all of these changes had been reverted. But I think they are both accurate and relevant, so I thought maybe a more senior editor would like to have a look at them, and see if they should be included on the page anyway? Thank you in advance either way and I hope you have a great day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darren.enlight (talk • contribs) 09:32, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Darren.enlight Unfortunately I don't think I can help you because 1948 has long been outside my areas of interest and I wouldn't want to make edits on your behalf while not engaging in the subject. Ilan Pappe's work, in particular, has never been in my area of interest cause I really don't like him and can't engage neutrally with his work. I think it would be better for you and for the community that you'll find other matters to deal with right now until you will get the extended-confirmed status which allows you to edit articles referring to the I/P conflict. Take care, --Bolter21(talk to me)17:19, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bolter21 → Thank you for the kind reply! I get what you're saying, I guess it's because what I added was something Pappe said about himself (that he's not interested in facts, he's interested in ideology) , I didn't think it would be about any subjectivity in engaging with his work, and I did think it was essential and sorely lacking on the page right now. I'm interested in a wide range of topics, so who knows if and when I get to the number of edits required for this and in the meantime, it feels like a shame that people won't have this important piece of information. But like I said, I get what you're saying and I thank you for the kind willingness to help. Darren.enlight (talk) 05:53, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, you edited while logged out, thus exposing your IP. On the assumption that it was accidental, I removed that detail from view except by admins. Zerotalk11:56, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you ever do make that mistake and want it hidden further, oversight will typically remove that (at least historically has). nableezy - 14:27, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Western Wall Tunnel riots until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
I managed to get hold of KAI in hard copy. I also have TSSI. When I have more time I am hoping to complete the Caananite and Aramaic inscriptions article. It is a tough slog as I am trying create sub articles for each one (or each group) and not all have much information available. Onceinawhile (talk) 23:26, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have access to KAI (and probably all others) through my institute's library (too bad I can't read German). I was hoping to have an online copy cause the library won't let you borrow it for more than 24 hours.--Bolter21(talk to me)09:49, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well currently there's one thing I seek. I am working on an essay about catrography of the Phoenician coast and in Helena Sader's 2019 book there's a map showing Taybeh (Marjaayoun) as the location of KAI 17 though now I see thanks to your article that it actually refers to Khirbet et-Taybeh near Ras el-Ayn (found it in the PEF's map).--Bolter21(talk to me)19:24, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Glad you found that Thrones article useful. I was quite proud of having brought all that into one place. Citation 9 (Ronzevalle) is the editio princeps so that has all the details. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:20, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that! This is extremely useful. I hope I'll find time to make a contribution to this article, as well as expanding the Canaanite and Aramaic inscriptions article. Also there's some more work on List of archaeological sites in Israel and Palestine. My original plan was to first collect all the data for the articles mentioned in this list and then make it more detailed (maybe splitting it between periods or between geographical regions) and later using it as a template for List of archaeological sites in Lebanon and List of archaeological sites in Jordan. I am hoping creating such lists can help bring more views and interest to such topics rather than all that I/P bullcrap (:
Hi,
Do you know what the latest policy is, wrt Arabic names on places in Israel? Is there a place where this is discussed? Huldra (talk) 22:58, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
First in regards to LinkageB0 comment, I do not want to be considered an authority on this, since I lack proper knowledge in law and state (something I wish I admitted long ago). What I (think I was) taught at civil studies back in high school was that Israel followed the "King's Order-in-Council" which was amended in 1939 to determine that official orders, posts, and documents will be published in English, Arabic, and Hebrew. I couldn't find the document in English but Wikitext has the complete Hebrew version (It is in line 82). This was, as far as I remember my whole life, understood as having Arabic as an official language next to Hebrew. In 2018 the Knesset passed Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People which determines that Hebrew is the [sole] official language in Israel, that Arabic has a "special status" and that "This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect". As far as I understand, this is all a game of interpretation. LinkageB0 and his sources are not right nor wrong in saying Arabic was demoted to a non-official language. There's a good article, unfortunately in Hebrew, which contains information about the different interpretations of line 82 in the Mandatory document. In regards to the Arabic language, the law doesn't really change anything but has a more symbolic meaning as the law determines for the first time that Israel is indeed the state of the Jewish people (unlike the Declaration of Independence which is not a law, or the Law of Return which only states that all Jews around the world have the privilege of becoming citizens). It is much more complicated than how international media would like to show it. Obviously many people oppose the Nationality Bill because of its nationalistic nature, and they would portray its negative interpretation (and this doesn't mean I personally support the bill). In regards to Arabic place names, I don't really know since this is a vague one. Most official road signs I see are trilingual. And by "most" I mean I don't remember seeing a bilingual one (Hebrew+English) but I didn't pay much attention to it. It doesn't matter if the locality is Jewish or Arabic.--Bolter21(talk to me)08:22, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks. One thing is laws in Israel, another thing is "wp-laws": I was hoping this had been discussed in one "central" place on wp. Apparently not, cheers, Huldra (talk) 21:32, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, make sure you log in before editing. I just removed your ip address from two edits that gave a rather precise location for you (right down to the department). I'm not completely sure it was necessary since the rules about who can see ip addresses were changed not long ago, but I did it anyway. Cheers. Zerotalk08:21, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are a good editor because you work hard to get the facts right. Huldra and I do that too. It is quite unkind of you to suggest that we aren't interested in the truth, and you should remove that charge. In the absence of incontrovertible evidence we won't agree on everything; that's just how it is. Zerotalk12:20, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Zero0000. I agree. I will remove that because it has nothing to contribute to the discussion nor to the truth. But it has been frustrating to go deep and get dry comments that barely respond to the work I've done, as if you are not willing to discuss.--Bolter21(talk to me)12:23, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I spent quite some time searching for sources and posted when I had something no matter how little. I still have some pointers that are waiting for a chance to visit a (physical) library. Probably they will not amount to much, but I'll look. Meanwhile, you want to discard Khalidi who devoted years to studying the depopulated villages and you won't take Morris' list at face value, but you don't have any published source stating explicitly that there was no population. Zerotalk02:35, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The thing is, I have used Khalidi for 15+ years, and I have checked many hundreds of his references (no exaggeration!) He is very rarely wrong. That both he and Morris should be wrong....I need stronger proof for that than your opinion. (Of course, Morris have occasionally been wrong, too). As for no built-up area; the pictures could explain some: why not use the caves? People are doing that in the South Hebron hills, still, today. Anyway, for me, "the jury is still out", as they say, (And I also greatly appreciate the work you do), Huldra (talk) 20:50, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Huldra Since we are here, I have never read anything by Khalidi so I can't really judge him thoroughly. What I can say is that Khalidi's account of villages is not so impressive, and I have found it very difficult to deal with his work since clearly, it is a Nakba-themed work like almost any other historical piece of work concerning the Palestinian. I am neither a big fan of Morris's work. I've read more of him, also in his native language, and my feeling is that his books are written too much as narratives than actual histories. Many of his claims are sharp and yet not backed up with clear sources. Gelber's work has been much more carefully articulated (And therefore, extremely boring). I am also refraining from Nationalist-Zionist-themed works, which oddly enough mostly don't constitute reliable sources in Wikipedia. There is a whole section on that spectrum, of work that has nothing to do with the political implications. Either way, I have detached myself from I/P matters precisely because I've developed a strong distrust of these sources. In the case of Zakariyya, I would take a bet and say that Khalidi saw Khirbat Zakariyya on the British list and assumed it was a village. You say they may have lived in the caves but Khalidi strictly talks about homes. Having read articles about the archaeological survey, the remains of many structures have been surveyed on the site, though they have been dated by archaeologists to much earlier dates. The fact the settlement deteriorated after the Crusades is quite clear from the archaeological evidence, and the absence of a village in all lists and maps hints that the grip the Khawaja family had on this land may have been late and if there was a village there, it would have been built in the 20th century, given that four different European accounts visited the site and reported no village, while Gurein reported crops. In Gurein's account, one entry before Zakariya there's another place called "Khurbet Hammam", which I couldn't locate, but the Archaeological Survey of Israel it is supposed to by just east of Jimzu. It is said there that the farmers working the land are from Midya, and Gurein is impressed they have already arrived so early. So it would make sense that the farmers at Zakariya, came from Midya as well, which is actually quite close to Zakariya.
Either way, I didn't see any clear evidence for the existence of a village in Zakariya, other than it was Khalidi who said it. Morris' account has no explanation and he only provides a date, which may have been created based on the account of the battles there, as the Jordanian Legion was repelled in the environs of Zakariya.
To my understanding, this is enough to exclude Khalidi's account, since it can't be confirmed, or otherwise, is not confirmed by anything else we have. We know for sure, that this supposed village is no older than 1900 and for some reason, it appeard for the first time only in 1945, still unpopulated, and all maps show it to be a ruin. The account of the battles in Operation Dani, speak about every single settlement in the region other than Zakariya, and from my expirience, the existence of Palestinian villages is quite clear to Israeli researchers, especially in the archaeological field, and no village is discriminated. Zakariya in this case, was the subject of serious archaeological research and yet no one bothered to say anything about a village. The latest remains reported there, are from the decades surrounding the Ottoman conquest.--Bolter21(talk to me)22:17, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
J'essaye d'améliorer la carte des dialectes arabes parlés en Israel et je suis tombé sur ta carte. J'aimerais trouver une version plus complète, plus granulaire et plus récente. Est-ce que ça existe ? (j'ai aussi posté ici).
Jai fait cette carte il y a six ou sept ans apres les data de Bureau Central de Statistics Israeliene. Il y a une version plus nuveau de cette carte, fait par une ottre editeur ici et ici. Je ne sais pas si il y a une carte meilleure. Quant au pourcentage, je suppose que il y a pas plain de differance depuis 2008. Il y a ~dix localites avec une population Juif et Arab et je ne sais pas si la census de 2022 nous donnes cette data. Il y a une carte de points, ou chaque point represent la population de 100 peuple, mais je ne sais pa ou. Je decouver cette carte de CBS mais je panse il ya une meilleure (dans cette carte la distinction est entre la religion). Il ya de nuveau Atlas de CBS.
No need to apologize, I challenged myself for it (:
I think the answer can be found here. From what I remember GovMap does not allow copying their data, but from what it seems, from the CBS you are permitted to do so.--Bolter21(talk to me)17:26, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
You are bludgeoning the discussion with walls of text and repetition and in the latest such wall, making accusations and casting aspersions on other editors. Kindly desist. Thank you. Selfstudier (talk) 15:44, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Selfstudier I will now avoid these discussions like fire, as the topic is too close to heart, and it is hard to compete with four people who share a completely opposite view of reality. Israel right now is in its worst state I've ever seen it, with a constitutional crisis, talks on the street of a civil war and the terror attacks that took place last year, including one right next to my home in Tel Aviv, have been the worst we've known since the Intifada. So I can't remain civil and therefore it would be better if I'll avoid those discussions, especially if I am the minority in the discussion.
But I have a non-binding question. In one of your arguments, you have brought up the UN calling it an "attack". In the article about the Neve Yaakov shooting, there are quotes from numerous world leaders, including Arab countries and the United Nations, who refer to it as an act of terror. The lead section doesn't mention the word terror at all. I am certainly not asking whether you think it is a terror attack, and I suspect one of your possible replies will refer to some acts on the Israeli side equating terror.
What I ask is, if there's a global consensus that was a terror attack, why isn't it described as so on the lead section?
Reply if you want. I am not planning on returning to these talkpages, and it is better that I won't even look at them or the articles they are attached to. Bolter21(talk to me)09:43, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
hard to compete with four people who share a completely opposite view of reality That is reversible, is it not? And you are not in the minority afaics, I am. In any case, "reality" has little to do with it, your reality may be one thing and that of an occupied Palestinian quite another.
As for attack, I believe it was Iskandar who first pointed that out and I found it to be so (in both cases). It is a bit like "apartheid", sundry politicians and individuals object to (or support) the word but do not engage with hundreds of pages of evidence. I prefer to go with the evidence myself and so does WP in general.
If independent reliable sourcing supports calling something terror, I would not object to it. Just because the JP, the ToI and so on routinely refer to anything done by a Palestinian as terror and every Palestinian (even if 13 years old) a terrorist does not mean we need to follow in WP voice. There is a reason that major newsorgs refrain from doing that and the four of them cited in the lead intro do not do so (they actually call it an attack but we settled on shooting anyway). Selfstudier (talk) 10:54, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No one talked about JP and ToI but of global leaders and officials and the UN who have referred to this specific attack as an act of terror. The WP policy regarding terror is well known to me and I've always followed it, even when it is contrary to my views. But in this case, there are plenty of quotes referring to it as an act of terror incl. French government, Indian spokesman, Turkish foreign affairs ministry, UAE (though not explicitly), UK Ambassador to Israel, US secretary of state, EU High representative and secretary general of the UN. At the very least, have the lead write that the attack is cited as a terror attack by these.
And I did not mean "view of reality" as in the "reality I live in". It seems the following sentence about the current state of affairs back home created the confusion. What was meant by "view of reality" is the inclinations in description and interpretation of events and context, in the very discussion we had (after most of the votes were casted). And what I wanted to say with the current state of affairs is that I am currently emotionally impaired to participate in these discussions, as evidenced by how poorly I've conducted myself there.
If you wish to add attributed statements to the article that so and so described it as (blah terror blah), I am not preventing you from doing that but then one should also include a list of so and so who did not so refer to it. For instance, Guterres is presented as saying it was terror on behalf of the UN when in fact that was Guterres in his personal capacity and not on behalf of the UN and when the idea that the synagogue had been attacked was the "story".(sourced to i24, what a surprise). Even then, the British refrained and said "To attack worshippers at a synagogue on Holocaust Memorial Day, and during Shabbat, is horrific." Selfstudier (talk) 12:13, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Selfstudier You could use a rhetoric less cynical (blah terror blah). The attack was a 6-minute rampage all through the street, right next to the Ateret Avraham synagogue, and took place on 20 in the evening, immediately after Friday prayers.
This is degenerating into the usual. (blah terror blah) is not cynical, saves me having to write out all the different versions.
right next to the Ateret Avraham synagogue is false, read the Haaretz description. Idk anything about prayers, when do they start and finish usually? Are you suggesting the attacker timed things so as to coincide with that? Or the remembrance? Or both? "Rampage"? Really? Look it up.
While we are at it, tell me what "It was Israel's deadliest peacetime Palestinian attack.." means? (sourced to ToI).
I have read Haaretz in Hebrew. There is a map there, showing the route of the assailant. He parked at 20:13 next to house no. 45 in Neve Yaakov blvd., and crossed the street and the light-rail track towards the Ateret Avraham Synagogue (which is at the community center). He walked 200 meters north of the Synagogue and began shooting people, killing four. He marched back towards the synagogue, during that time he killed another motorcyclist. Then he returned to the synagogue, where he encountered people who left the synagogue due to the noise, and fired at them, later people from the neighborhood arrived and tendered to the wounded, and he shot at them (two of these were later pronounced dead). At 20:17 he entered his car and drove towards the Beit Hanina junction, where he saw police officers. He pulled his firearm and shot at them, and by 20:19, after a brief chase, he was shot dead. There's also a report of Haaretz journalist Josh Breiner on twitter, where you can see the synagogue.
The English version, which is behind a paywall, states "Seven Israelis were killed and three were wounded on Friday evening in a shooting attack near a synagogue in the East Jerusalem settlement of Neveh Yaakov, in the deadliest terror attack Israel has seen in years".
I cannot speak for the attacker because he is dead, but it is common knowledge that religious Jews gather in a synagogue on Shabbat eve every week, all year. The Holocaust rememberance day however, is less relevent (because Israel has its own with the sirens and everything). The motive can be linked more to Jenin than to the international Holocaust remembrance day). Bolter21(talk to me)13:37, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The English version, which is behind a paywall, states "Seven Israelis were killed and three were wounded on Friday evening in a shooting attack near a synagogue in the East Jerusalem settlement of Neveh Yaakov, in the deadliest terror attack Israel has seen in years"
I just read it again, that is false. The only place where the word "terror" (terrorist, etc) appears is in the headline (not RS per WP:HEADLINES) where it says "Six Minutes of Terror: How the Deadliest Attack in Israel in Recent Years Unfolded" Selfstudier (talk) 13:57, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I did not refer to Haaretz calling it a terror attack. It doesn't matter to me if Haaretz calls it a terror attack, becuase it follows the Israeli consensus. What do you refer to as "false" exactly?" Bolter21(talk to me)14:03, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I just told you, I even quoted the paragraph that you say is in the English version. I just read it and it is NOT in the English version (the url is in the article). Selfstudier (talk) 14:13, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I originally referred you to the Haaretz story that is cited in the article (dated 28th). You replied that you couldn't read it because it was behind a paywall but then claimed it contained a paragraph that you quoted to me. It does not contain that paragraph. Now, you are talking about a Haaretz article of the 27th (the day before), what has an earlier story to do with anything? I'm done here, if you want to trade bs, do it on the article talk page, please. Ttfn. Selfstudier (talk) 14:30, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Trade bullshit? I was interested to see if a discussion is possible and I was trying to get into your head and better understand where the differences lay, to improve on the next discussion. The Hebrew article I've shown, by the way, is from 28th. I will return to that article when I'll have more time and patience. Bolter21(talk to me)14:35, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bolter, do you have any reason to go near Degania Alef? If so, I am compiling a list of all the Egyptian Stelae in the Levant; one of them appears to be at The Gordon House Museum, but has no online photos.[4]
Hi! What a wonderful initiative! Sadly, it is a two hours ride and I am in the midst of a packed semester. You can try and contact some of the excavation members of Kinneret project to donate a picture if they have. Usually archaeologist don't mind that from my experience.
Besides that, there's the original publication, which was published in 1928 by a dead man (died 1971, over 50 years ago), so maybe it is no longer protected by a copyrights shield and it is in public domain.
Either way, fyi, archaeologists in in Israel (foreign or local) typically respond quickly to emails and might be happy to help with pictures or other stuff.
Fellow Wikipedians, I would like to share that since Saturday morning I am in combat reserve service near the front in Gaza, fighting against the barbarian invasion of Hamas. I want to strengthen all of the Wikipedians who genuinely strive to tell the truth. Do not back down and don't let the cynics shove irrelevant pseudo-rationales and wikipolicies that would downplay the scale of this crime. There are numerous reports all over the media from reliable sources. A lot of clean up is needed as these events are unfolding and Western media begin to realize them much later than needed. Do not let anyone decive you. I am next to the Frontline, with lots of friends and family whose loved ones were butchered. The enemy is cynically denying anything they themselves filmed doing. Don't legitimize this. Hamas is evil, don't fall into that stupid relativistic attitude, that attempts to show the "other side" of Hamas. Show the true pictures from Gaza, the voice of the Gazans, but not the voice of Hamas. A group that launches an attack that massacres, butchers innocent men, women and babies, a group that burns houses with civilians trapped inside, forcing them to flee and then massacring them. My friends told me they were piling bodies from the festival with a tractor and tried to burn them. A family member of a friend of mine was raped three times. Others were abducted. A friend of mine told me she hid in a bunker, luckily left to treat the wounded, and she saw the terrorists throwing grenades into the bunkers. Her friends were injured, others killed. She carried them wounded under fire. Ive received these testimonies already on Saturday morning. At the kibbutzim, babies were abducted, others killed, choked, and beheaded. Grandmothers were abducted, entire families were wiped out.
This is not an IDF assault from air on a building used by Hamas, housing civilians as human shields. And this is no mistake. There is no way to compare. None of these people were a threat to anyone, they were not next to IDF troops. This was done by hands. This is not arresteding Palestinian rioters. I've done it countless times during my service. Never, NEVER through my entire service have we ever treated an arrested Palestinian that way. We never beat them, never torture them. And if any of my soldiers mistreated them I would stop them immediately. We were always told, the IDF's morals are the Purity of Arms, the Value of Human Life. We have been attacked to many times, we were equipped with guns and could massacre the masses, but we never did. We suffered rocks and molotov cocktails, got injured but never lost our humanity. Never tortured. I have always had a soft spot for Palestinian children, when entering their homes, I hated the idea of their fear. I often comforted them. And also during the checkpoints. Countless times we laughed with them, gave them high fives. We treated them as human. I know the situation in for the Palestinians is not good. I know it is wrong. We are not blind for it. And more often then not I've regretted our governments. I believe they deserve to live good lives just like we do. But Hamas are not true representatives of the Palestinians. They are a proxy of Iran, they are a lunatic, ultra-religious murderous organization. They portray themselves as the weak, freedom fighters, but in truth, they are just thugs. All of them. We are no saints, but they are the devil. While we sometimes fall in judgment, they have no morals in the first place. They celebrate death, cheer for the sight of fire and enjoy the smell of blood. They are animals and they have always been, ever since they started with the suicide bombings. And Hezbollah and the PIJ and all other TERRORIST Organizations are no different.
I woke up on Saturday with a rocket barrage on my city, Tel Aviv, in the metropolitan area of 3 million people was attacked. A rocket fell in my neighborhood, where there is no military presence, no strategic sites. Just civilians. No more than 6 hours later, I was already on my way south to arm up with hundreds of other reservists in my unit. Some of them I've never seen, people who did not show up to previous reserve activity for years have showed up. 300 thousand Israelis showed up. This is the largest deployment in the country's history. This is how eager we are to defend our homeland. And civilians are doing circle in the air just to provide us with food and equipment. Everyone joined, not a single soul in Israel remained indifferent. Jews, Drzue, Christians, Arabs, Bedouin, people who just a few seconds ago only saw their differences, have all united against evil. There is no question here, Hamas must be eradicated, just like ISIS. And what they have done is as big a crime against Israel as it is to the Palestinians. They have done nothing but bring on death and destruction on themselves, and we haven't started yet.
I am now near the front, thwarting continous infiltration attempts. They keep shooting on civilians. Rockets are falling near us, exploding over our heads. But our spirit is strong, we are strongly united, brothers and sisters, from all over the country, religious, secular, rich, poor... While their leaders are hiding in bunkers, some of our leaders, members of the Knesset, have showed up, volunteered to join the fighting units. My battalion commander has lost his 18 year old son, and before burying or even seeing him, he decided to show up and help in whatever he can, even though he was given the option to stay home and whip. This is the spirit of our country. And we have no other land to go to. This is our secret weapon. We have one homeland. My Israeli friends from across the world all began organizing donations, others have bought tickets, cutting their trips by months and came back to recruit. My little cousins set up stations to collect food and supplies from civilians for the soldiers. We cannot be beaten, and whoever will challenge us will be destroyed.
I am no religious person, but now more than ever the words Am Yisrael Chai are inscribed on my heart. I have gave much thought about my grandparents who fought the Nazi attempt to eradicate them, and others who suffered persecution anywhere they've been. Here we are united together, we have the right and duty to help ourselves. And we will do that for eternity.
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ascalon, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Canaanite and Phoenician.
I'm sorry to see the way that other editors are talking to you in recent discussions. But you're very good at keeping cool! – Joe (talk) 09:19, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Edit wars are boring.
Last year I have seen actual war, spending as many days there as I was spending back home. There were as 10 times more blasts in the sky and on the ground than the sun was rising and setting. Some of them were very close, the earth was shaking and debris fell from the sky. Some of my friends and acquaintances were buried. Some people I used to dance with were gunned down in a party I was planning to buy a ticket to. A trade of brutal violence is prevalent anywhere you go, and at any moment I might be called up again, just to randomly perish and become a statistic.
I have no intention to mimic this into a virtual space dedicated for enriching human knowledge. Often I am fantasizing on sitting for a coffee with "that other editors". Surely will be interesting.
I am deeply humbled by your compliment, and thank you for your constructive contribution to the discussions and to Archaeology as a whole. Hopefully we will have more opportunities to collaborate on more constructive matters.
I've nothing that compares to such awful experiences, but it must make these disputes seem very petty indeed. Imagining talking over a cup of coffee is a great attitude.
I saw on your user page that you've started a masters, I hope you have or will be able to continue with those despite all this. Good luck and if you're ever tempted to cross over to the really old stuff, do get in touch! – Joe (talk) 15:32, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was wondering if you had a shapefile for that map, or if you didn't use a shapefile, then if you at least had a blank version of that map. I'm interested in making some (somewhat different) maps of Israeli election results, and this would be a huge help.
Hey, I have made the original map, and back then I didn't use an GIS program, but created it with no more than MS Paint. Unfortunately there is no shapefile. I believe you can find a shapefile for Israeli municipalities in Israel's government website. Bolter21(talk to me)10:21, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hi Bolter21, you previously disclosed on your user page that you were paid by the Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology for editing two Wikipedia articles. Were you also paid for creating the entry on the institute? Richard Nevell (talk) 20:39, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:PAID isn't exactly clear about situations where there was paid work initially that then changed, and I can see that if the final edits were not paid why a declaration was not made. However, if there was paid work in the initial draft I think a declaration - as was done with previous edits - would be best practice. That makes things transparent and you could include the context that the most recent edits were unpaid.
Hey Ozzie10aaaa. Thank you dearly for the reply on the draft. The primary source issue is something that I saw coming. Here are some remarks on that matter, it would be great to hear your opinion.
The article describes the institute and department of archaeology in Tel Aviv University (which are essentially two branches of the same body). It is a description of what the institute does and its facilities. Most of the information appears in the institute website, which is indeed a WP:Primary source, though a WP:REPUTABLE one. I refrained from any interpretation of these sources, and included the driest, most concrete information. As much as possible I added secondary sources. Out of 79 individual references (some used multiple times), 35 are secondary/tertiary sources (20 peer-reviewed articles; 9 news articles; 6 websites; 1 academic book). Generally half of the article is supported by non-primary sources, and the ones that are employed are WP:REPUTABLE and used under WP:Primary. Some of the information can stand on the secondary sources alone, though the primary source provides clean and vital information.
The only sections which are exclusively based on primary sources are the last two sections about the publications and department, as for them I didn't find any secondary sources.
Based on WP:REPUTABLE, isn't that satisfactory? And if not, maybe trimming some of the content will make do?
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThisIsAgain32 (talk • contribs) 08:10, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aircorn -- Aircorn (talk) 21:01, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
; see Talk:Mishmar HaEmek for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aircorn -- Aircorn (talk) 07:01, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Mishmar HaEmek at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 20:30, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
; see Talk:Tel Yokneam for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ganesha811 -- Ganesha811 (talk) 15:42, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Mishmar HaEmek for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ganesha811 -- Ganesha811 (talk) 16:01, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
