User talk:MichaelNetzer/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

Dispute resolution survey

Peace dove.svg

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite


Hello MichaelNetzer. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.


You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 23:02, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

ADL

Hi Michael, I saw your comment at AE. Just in case you are unaware of the details, which appears to be the case based on your comment, ADL said "Since the signing of the Oslo Declaration of Principles, no new settlements have been built."[1] That statement, or thereabouts, stated as a fact according to ADL, is what was in the Israeli settlement article. No need to reply. Sean.hoyland - talk 12:54, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)And statement about donors its not statement of fact?--Shrike (talk) 15:33, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
The statement above only pertains to Michael's comments about the ADL statement at AE. I'm making no comment on anything else in the universe, partly because I haven't read everything in that AE and I've already voiced my opinions about IRMep elsewhere. Michael's comment just struck me a case where the signal might have got lost in the noise, so you can treat it as an attempted deconvolution and nothing more. Sean.hoyland - talk 15:43, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't see a difference between the two, Sean. Either both are opinion or both are fact. The legal statement on settlements states that "[Israel's] view" is rejected by the ICJ. Israel's position on the settlements, from which is derived Israel's position that it has not built new settlements since Oslo (except in East Jerusalem which it does not consider settlements) this is considered "Israel's view", not fact. The ADL stated its opinion in support of Israel's view. But since Shuki was indeffed on the basis that ADL's opinion is a statement of fact, the same should apply here. I'm sorry to say this, Sean, but the bias against certain editors at AE is so transparent that it's a wonder some Administrators are able to say what they do sometimes with a straight face. --MichaelNetzer (talk) 15:47, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Two ? I'm only talking about one statement by ADL, "Since the signing of the Oslo Declaration of Principles, no new settlements have been built." You're not going to drag me into that debate. :) I will say though that in Sean-world, the ADL statement is a "liar liar pants on fire" statement, but it doesn't matter. I probably shouldn't have said anything. I just thought you had been distracted by the innocence statement. Nevermind. I didn't really follow Shuki's case but my impression is that admins are biased against all editors at AE, which is probably a good thing. Of course, my way of measuring bias is undocumented, unreliable, non-deterministic and presumably biased. Also, I don't see topic bans as a hardship, more like a holiday. Sean.hoyland - talk 16:08, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Well, you should never hesitate or regret saying anything like that here, or anything else on your mind for that matter. I'll try to make my response as painless as possible: In Israel-world, there's a vast divide between an outpost and a settlement. If the Israel/ADL position of 1997 is considered a lie, then by a similar but opposite semantic, a statement to the contrary would also be a lie. But holidays are always good. --MichaelNetzer (talk) 06:26, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Consider the difference between the following two statements:
  • No new settlements have been built since the end of the Oslo process.
  • In 1997, the ADL stated that no new settlements had been built since the end of the Oslo process.
The first is asserting a fact about the building of new settlements, for which the only source given was an unsigned ADL webpage which dates back to 1997 and which more recent sources contradict.
The second is asserting as a fact that the ADL stated something about settlements in 1997. That they did that is not in question.
    ←   ZScarpia   10:01, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

  • Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
  • Research: The most recent DR data
  • Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
  • Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
  • DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
  • Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
  • Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?
Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->

--The Olive Branch 19:17, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution RFC

Hello.As a member of Wikiproject Dispute Resolution I am just letting you know that there is an RFC discussing changes to dispute resolution on Wikipedia. You can find the RFC on this page. If you have already commented there, please disregard this message. Regards, Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 08:52, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:MichaelNetzer/Growing Earth Theory

User:MichaelNetzer/Growing Earth Theory, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:MichaelNetzer/Growing Earth Theory and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:MichaelNetzer/Growing Earth Theory during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. jps (talk) 16:43, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:MichaelNetzer/Growing Earth Theory (22:45, May 31, 2008)

User:MichaelNetzer/Growing Earth Theory (22:45, May 31, 2008), a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:MichaelNetzer/Growing Earth Theory (22:45, May 31, 2008) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:MichaelNetzer/Growing Earth Theory (22:45, May 31, 2008) during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. jps (talk) 16:47, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Just a note

I appreciated the tone of those comments re the AE Gilabrand case, Michael. Nishidani (talk) 15:34, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I will appreciate it to see your notes concerning my remarks in the Arab Israeli 1948 war talk page.

Hi

I will appreciate it to see your notes concerning my remarks in the Arab Israeli 1948 war talk page.

I am an Israeli, but try to be objective. I am the only Israeli regular editor in these articles, and the other editors reactions are mostly negative , as expected. It is much better to hear your opinion as well. If you are not too busy, will it be possible for you to comment in the talk page.

thanks Ykantor (talk) 18:52, 21 November 2013 (UTC)