User talk:Nableezy/Archive 11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 5 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 15


Be careful not to violate 3RR. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 22:09, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

You think the last one is a revert? nableezy - 22:18, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
It wasn't, but they take a pretty broad view of 3RR at WP:ANEW. It's probably best not to make more than three non-consecutive edits during any 24-hour period. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 22:26, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

your revert in the Ethnic Cleansing article

Concerning the revert you made of the material in the ethnic cleansing article with the summary "it actually is well sourced with scholarly text calling it such" - I responded to these concerns on the talk page [1] and demonstrated carefully that the sources that were used in writing the article did not in fact support what was claimed. No page numbers were cited, authors were cited as support that simply did not support. As it stands the edit is improperly sourced as well as misleading. As I suggested on the talk page, you can rewrite the section with proper sources that actually support the contention. In the meantime, it would be wrong to leave such poorly and even wrongfully sourced material in. I went to some trouble to write a small essay that showed the passage was not "well sourced with scholarly text," before I deleted the passage. Did you [even] read it prior to your revert? Stellarkid (talk) 02:21, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes I did, and I also saw the detailed response that showed multiple scholars using the term. You really want to contend that Ilan Pappé's The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine is not a proper source for the material? You want page numbers? pps xi - 261. nableezy - 03:41, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


Hi, Just in case you are doing it the hard way like I did until recently, here is a quick way to find unispal links to the documents that used to be in domino. I'm not sure it always works but I've have some luck with it. Consider the change you just make on Palestinian refugee:


The key is that the second long code is the same as before. To find it, do this search in Google:   intext:93037e3b939746de8525610200567883

Hope that's not old news. It might also work without the "intext:". Cheers. Zerotalk 14:37, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, and I was doing it the hard way. This should make it easier. nableezy - 14:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Return of Samaria

Hi Nableezy,

I'd fix this myself, but seeing as I'm barred from editing on the topic, doing so may be a bad idea... Shuki (talk · contribs) has taken it upon himself to add infoboxes to a number of settlements, and in doing so, labeling them as being in Samaria (e.g. here, here or here).

Could you have a look if you've got the spare minutes and nerves?

Many thanks, pedrito - talk - 15:33 18.08.2009

P.S. By the way, cool signature ;)

I asked Shuki about it. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (West Bank) specifically says we cannot say a place is "in Samaria" without qualification and that is what the infoboxes do. As for the sig, thanks for not yelling for stealing yours. nableezy - 15:44, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I feel oddly compelled to write this message and sign it. Sean.hoyland - talk 15:58, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Ahh, like Agada you assumed you were the inspiration. Nay I say! The differences between us are wide, you have not figured out the most important part of the signature, the unification of time with name. A little hunting helped me find the way to such an aesthetically pleasing formulation, and I now no longer have to type the fourth ~. nableezy - 16:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
No I didn't, I was just fessing up to Pedrito. That and an inherent tendency to flock towards small rectangles. Sean.hoyland - talk 16:10, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Is this Pedrito canvassing a blatant violation of the ARBCOM ruling or is a request for clarification needed?--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 16:03, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Is Shuki adding Samaria as the region a blatant violation of the naming convention guidelines mandated by an arbcom decision or is an AE thread needed? Either way, I dont give much of a fuck, the point is getting things done. You want to run to WP:AE and demand justice that is your choice. nableezy - 16:06, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Didn't think you gave a fuck, but I thought this was the best place to bring it up. Btw, the double oxymoronic - 'violate a mandated guideline' - brought a smile to my face. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 16:10, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
But like a triple negative it should be fine right? nableezy - 16:14, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Not a bad point.But it's not like I don't have to get on with my non-wiki life. I won't not see you later.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 16:17, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Template

Hi Nableezy! I just don't think it's important. SlimVirgin is making too big a fuss over it, just like Nishidani was at ArbCom. It wouldn't really be a problem to make the clause you are suggesting, although it would have to be 1 not 0, because you said you wanted to make it display "Israel" when an empty value is given, and I believe code on Wiki, like PHP, interprets null or "" as 0. So, again, if it's really important to you, I'll give it a look. Cheers, Ynhockey (Talk) 20:05, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Friendly advice

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Don't let yourself get too worked up and put yourself in the wrong (I asume you know what I'm talking about). I have a soft spot in my heart for pro-Palestinian editors with a sense of humor who know what they're talking about and edit sanely, so do me a favor and stay out of trouble. IronDuke 20:53, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

fuck that, calling her a "stinking nasty little bitch" is not something I am just going to let go. Dr Blowhard chased off a user that put in an insane amount of work on these articles because he doesnt like red links. To have somebody who put in nothing of any value at all say that to user that has put in a lot is not something I can just let slide. But thanks for the friendly message. nableezy - 20:57, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
(ec)I have already warned Dr. B on his talk page and at least he removed what he said from my talk page and that of Tiamut's. Nab, akhi, don't get dragged into this swearing fit (at least not here). It's extremely unfortunate and saddening for me also to hear that Huldra is leaving, but besides trying to convince her to stay, there's not much more we could do. I think time will solve this problem and she'll return to improve the depopulated villages... it will be hard for her to resist. Salam, --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:59, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I appreciate the sentiment, but I didnt even say anything to him about chasing her off, even though after he was politely asked to stop with the rapid fire creations that add nothing of value just kept going. But calling her what he did is not something I am willing to lay down for and if that gets me blocked so be it.
Personally attacking Blofeld for his personal attacks is no less egregious than his initial attack. He has been warned, and now you are being warned. Stop calling people "assholes" or you may be blocked for repeated personal attacks. The discussion has moved to WP:ANI; if you wish to engage in a civil discussion on the issues without resorting to name calling and personal attacks, please join us. If you just want to continue the vitriol, it would be better for all involved if you did not. --Jayron32 21:05, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I asked if he could not be a complete asshole. He was being a complete asshole. There really is no other way to describe somebody who calls somebody a "stinking nasty little bitch". And "asshole" is certainly less egregious than "stinking nasty little bitch". So, no, I do not wish to engage in a civil discussion on this so Ill just keep my fingers off the keyboard, at least until I get to WR. nableezy - 21:08, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
habibi nableezy ... dude ... I understand how angry you are. My baba would be the same way is he heard someone talk about a woman like that. But let's just try not to contribute to negative energy here. Okay? Tiamuttalk 21:06, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
(ec)Nableezy, this is Wikipedia not a battlefield—you know that. What Dr. B stated was disgusting and an AN/I report is apparently underway discussing the matter. I warned him already to keep that rhetoric outside of wiki so hopefully he'll get the point. If not, like I just said, there is an AN/I report that will deal with him. Huldra has already departed, and many more of our colleagues have become totally inactive. Last thing we need now is your disappearence. --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:09, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

<- "Fuckwit" would have been better than "asshole". I'm just saying. For example, "Your edit to the talk page does not comply with WP:NPA and could be regarded as fuckwitism. Please strike it forthwith.". Or an AN/I report might work too. Sean.hoyland - talk 06:17, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

There are two sides to every story Nableezy. I actually tried to help your Palestinian project my creating missing articles on depopulated Arab settlements. Check my contributions in the last 24 hours. "To have somebody who put in nothing of any value " is far from the truth. I've created half of the articles on depopulated Arab settlements myself to try to help your project in good faith, this is why I was upset. Yesterday I worked at least 8 hours hard trying to improve them and then I spoken about behind my back to her, my big efforts referred to as "diarrhea" and listed as the reason for her leaving wikipedia because I tried in good faith to help the project. If by editing is disrespected and basically referred to as faeces then is it surprising I responded like that? I rarely lose my temper at somebody like that but inviting people to attack me in a forum is a rotten (hence stinking) thing to do and I tend to treat others as they treat me. For the record I do want her to return as I appreciate her editing and I think this conflict was avoidable, but your language towards me was far far worse...

P.S I added infoboxes to all the places in Egypt and sorted out an svg map plus I have started the lists of Egyptian films and contributed to articles about pharoahs in the past. So I am a very active member of the project across the world, this is why it angers me when people refer to my work as faeces like she did and when you say " "I have contributed nothing". I have probably contributed the most insane amount of work to wikipedia than anybody, seriously. I have nothing but good intentions on here towards you people and twoards your related articles will equally I will not be spoken about like that either... I made a disgusting remark about a disgusting forum attacking me. Regards Dr. Blofeld White cat 09:19, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Now that everyone has had their say both on and off wiki, group hug ? There's serious work to be done here. Sean.hoyland - talk 09:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Well I would, but people here continue to attack me where they can't be blocked,. I still mean well and do things in good faith, but I no longer have any ill feelings towards you, whatever rude names you call me. Dr. Blofeld White cat 10:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

P.S. tell Somey lover of Blofeld on wikipediareview that I have never used semi automation in my life. All of my articles are manually started and manually written. Dr. Blofeld White cat 10:31, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I have nothing more to say about this on-wiki, if you want to tell Somey something on WR do it yourself. nableezy - 15:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Gaza War

Because I am not making a list, I am listing them as they go along. As Hamas fatalities were significantly larger, it would be much harder to document them as it is the Israeli fatalities. uses Ynet News as its source, which is considered a reliable source by Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reenem (talkcontribs) 00:42:00, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Because there were only 10 fatalities, so why not include them all? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reenem (talkcontribs) 00:46, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Like I said, I am listing them as they go along. If I had listed them in line, it would be a memorial, but as it goes with the article, it is simply fact. I have also just replaced the reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reenem (talkcontribs) 00:55, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Because its easier since there were 10 Israelis killed. Note that the names of Hamas commanders killed are also frequently mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reenem (talkcontribs) 04:57, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Harlan wilkerson

There is no Wikipedia policy that I'm aware of which requires me to lie back passively while another user engages in crude personal slurs against me. Harlan Wilkerson is free to repost his comments at any time once he has brought them into compliance with the WP:NPA policy. Until that time, they have no place on an article talk page... AnonMoos (talk) 02:07, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: "deleting 6k bytes over 1 word" -- I really can't selectively edit his remarks. That would be highly deceptive and dishonest on my part (me making Harlan appear to say something which he didn't actually say). It's really up to him to edit his remarks in his own chosen way in order to bring them in compliance with Wikipedia policies. AnonMoos (talk) 02:27, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
"3RR" doesn't apply to removing vandalism and similar... AnonMoos (talk) 13:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
If I wanted Harlan_wilkerson to be blocked or reprimanded, then I would lodge an official complaint, but I don't really care whether or not he's blocked or reprimanded -- I just want the crude personal slurs removed, without necessarily waiting for the exceedingly slow processes of Wiki-justice to come to full and final completion. AnonMoos (talk) 21:30, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Format mess-up

Your comment messed up the number format because "#" doesn't continue to the next number but starts from 1 again. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 04:30, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

fixed, but could you answer the question raised? nableezy - 04:39, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
If you can't fix it then fine, but it's still kinda screwed up cuz now there's 1's all over the place.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 04:42, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
It is fixed so the next single # will be in sequence, only way to do it is have the indented numbers. Should I just move all the comments to the comment area? nableezy - 04:45, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Actually, now fixed for real. Just start with a # and then indent with : nableezy - 04:48, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


Thank you for your words Nableezy. You are a fair and good contributor. Unfortunately for wp, ceedjee account is disactivated and it will not come back... I contribute a little bit under IP but it will step by step decrease... Next step for me is to publish in international papers about all that stuff ;-). Good continuation (talk) 10:57, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Ramadan mubarak

God bless, akhi. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:30, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Ramadan Karim. I wanted to say it earlier ... forgive please. Tiamuttalk 00:23, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
My family uses a lot of "please", "thank you", "forgive me" and "sorry". Bad habit I picked up from them. ;) Anyway akhi, I'll try to stop using it with you. I know that kind of civility of this page could come off like swear words considering the sign at the top setting a different set of rules. Salamat. Tiamuttalk 07:35, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Moshe Ya'alon thanks

Yup, when I talked about "a Google search of the term", that is of course exactly what I meant. Thanks for pointing it out, since my antagonist didn't seem to quite get it. Nor do they seem to understand the difference between searching with inverted commas around a phrase and doing it without them. I would respond to their strange accusation that I am "misrepresenting" the Google results, but it all seems a bit petty really and of course I probably shouldn't be there anyway. Anyway, keep up the good work - I still have a look around occasionally and find myself aghast at what still goes on at some of these pages, eg the loading of massive Israel-related "criticism" sections into articles - including those pages that are only tangentially related to the I/P conflict, such as the BBC, The Guardian and the United Nations - and inserting text and phrasing from random one-off op-eds as if it were an uncontroversial assertion of fact. Not to mention all the socking that's obviously going on. --Nickhh (talk) 12:11, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I am trying to figure out who LOTRQ was prior to this username, you can plainly see from the users first 200 or so edits that they knew what they were doing and they had been here before, but I just cannot figure out who was the prior name. The argument style seems familiar, but I cannot figure out which user this one is socking for. At least a couple of the more annoying ones have been caught already. nableezy - 17:41, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Well, if you take 1000 sample edits by NoCal and about 650 sample edits by LOTRQ, sort them by the time of the edit (just the time of day) and plot a graph that shows when during the day the users edit you would see that the gaps i.e the times of day when the users don't edit line up almost perfectly. What does that prove ? Nothing much but it might be a clue. Sean.hoyland - talk 01:51, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Im thinking if it is NoCal he would have been caught already, see how quick it was for the users in Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of NoCal100. But the argument style is similar. nableezy - 04:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Only if someone is paying attention I guess. This is what caught my eye (I found the response unconvincing) together with the gradual increase in the number I-P conflict articles edited and the knowledge/willingness to employ the standard tools of the trade like 3RR warning etc. Sean.hoyland - talk 04:15, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
The timings match up NoCal LOTRQ, but all that means is similar time zone. Not enough to actually get a checkuser done. nableezy - 05:10, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Hey, wikichecker is nice. I've not seen that before. I wish I had before I copy/pasted everything into openoffice, d'oh! Yes, same timezone and statistically similar habits. It would make more sense to ease the checkuser request restrictions in areas subject to sanctions. People are often blocked as sockpuppets on very tenuous evidence without a checkuser. Seems bizarre. Reminds me of the no fly list implementation in the states. Oh well. Sean.hoyland - talk 05:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
I was closer to thinking User:Canadian Monkey. But I don't want to make wild accusations, so I retract the suggestion immediately. --Nickhh (talk) 15:08, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Matches up too, hell maybe they are all the same person. But I retract that immediately as well. nableezy - 15:14, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Sholam Weiss

I am at my wit's end. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Judymiller2468. I also amended your edit warring report on the other user.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 14:59, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I reverted to the wrong version. There was so much vandalism to the article I got confused.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 19:13, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

All good, and if I were you I would request a checkuser in the SPI page. The user is socking while blocked, which should cause the block to be extended. nableezy - 19:16, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
I see that EdJohnston has already made that request. My feeling was that the sockpuppeting was so obvious that a checkuser was unnecessary. --JohnnyB256 (talk) 19:18, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


Don't waste too much of yours on explanations. He hears only what he wants to, as evidenced by that last revert. Its a colossal waste of time and energy. Many of the things he is reinstating were addressed by Haberstr earlier. Tiamuttalk 21:05, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

images matter

can you take a look here? User talk:Sceptic Ashdod#File copyright problem with File:GazaWar double affiliation.jpg (it is not about this particular image, but other 2 of the same origin). thanks. Sceptic from Ashdod (talk) 04:46, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I am afraid I may have been wrong in saying these were free images. I was under the impression these were images taken by the IDF and released by the state, not just used by the state from a 3rd party. nableezy - 05:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Modiin Illit

I thank you for the attention that you are giving this article along with the other Israeli articles as well. By you focusing on them while we increasing NPOV and resisting the continued attempt to delegitimize, causes us to improve them instead. Personally, I would like to move on to editing other areas, but your infatuation interest actually forces me into doing more research and expanding the articles way past what would have been permanent stub status. I never thought I would know so much about the settlement enterprise. And bringing in SV to take the article into a tangent bringing up an ancient 'internal' discussion about Haredi vs UltraO also brings more awareness to that issue too. --Shuki (talk) 21:49, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I didnt bring in SV and her position on Haredi vs ultra-Orthodox is one that I disagree with, though I am not that interested in it. I feel we shouldn't be using terms to define people that are offensive to those people, and if ultra-Orthodox offends then just use Haredi. But my concern on these pages is the attempt to make them seem like these places are in Israel. They are not. They are not just "Israeli cities", they are settlements, I prefer the term colony but NPOV and all that, built in occupied territory. I dont know what you mean by attempting to "delegitimize" and if you want to explain that feel free. I dont see how you can say I am not working towards NPOV on these pages, I just dont want a tiny minority viewpoint being used as if it were a NPOV. nableezy - 21:59, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Please tell, what is the difference in meaning between 'Israeli settlement' and 'Israeli city'. Israeli city is POV, but Israeli settlement is not? Your double standard is absurd on one hand, and your insistence to detach the nationality of the locality and the type of locality is making it hard for you to accept NPOV and proper use of the English language. 'Israeli settlement' is a label, it does not describe what the locality is. The article is first and foremost about the dry facts of what, where, size, as well as history. You can't deprecate 'city' to something secondary, because that goes against simple writing conventions, that is POV. There are five Israeli cities that are also labelled settlements. They are cities, with tens of thousands of residents, this is undeniable. Since you refuse to accept 'in Israel', then they must alternatively be described as Israeli. It is undeniable that they are Israeli cities. It would be misleading to the readers to not add this description. --Shuki (talk) 22:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
The difference is that an Israeli city is in Israel, ie not in occupied territory. There is an established phrase used for any "Israeli" locality built in occupied territory, that phrase is "Israeli settlement". I would not use the term "Israeli settlement" for any locality in Israel, but for colonies built outside of Israel that is what they are known as. Not "Israeli cities". Everybody besides an extreme, albeit vocal, minority calls these places settlements. They do that to the exclusion of calling them cities. "Israeli settlement" is a label, a label that describes the place, in fact it gives it a more accurate description than "Israeli city". "Israeli settlement" describes it as a locality of Israelis built on occupied land. Israeli city only describes the size, which we already do by giving the size and saying "largest settlement" (which you also want to change to "largest city"). They are indeed cities, but they are cities of Israelis in Palestinian territory, not Israeli cities. "Israeli settlement" is the standard usage across the world and using the preferred language of a tiny minority when the overwhelming majority of reliable sources say "Israeli settlement" and not "Israeli city" is what is in violation of WP:NPOV. nableezy - 23:12, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
This has been discussed endlessly before but your POV will continue to argue. The whole world over (on WP as well), 'settlements' is a bland term interchangeable with 'locality' which sounds quite technical. Only in Israel, sorry in the Judea, Samaria and Gaza Area, does settlement taken on an additional meaning (while you'll agree with me that in Arabic this term is widely used to describe Israeli localities anywhere in Palestine', right?) city and village are NPOV 'human' terms, while 'Israeli settlement' implies something else. A house in East Jerusalem is an Israeli settlement and so is Modi'in Illit with its shopping malls, supermarkets, nurseries, schools, health clinics, etc...
FWIW, you do realize that your argument is ridiculous in your attempt at all costs to say that Israeli city does not equal German city or Russian city. That combination of two words 'Israeli city' is POV. Uh, huh. It's an attempt to continue the dehumanizing of the settlements. Remove the human term, replace with dry expression. --Shuki (talk) 23:51, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
No, I am not saying an Israeli city does not equal a German or Russian city, what I am saying is that these are not Israeli cities. Yes, settlements in E. Jerusalem, or the West Bank, or the Golan (all Israeli occupied) are called settlements. Israeli settlement has a specific meaning, in fact one of the reasons we use the Israeli municipality infobox was to avoid using the word settlement for cities in Israel (lit. in Israel). And I have never heard the word "مستوطنة" (settlement) or "مستوطنة إسرائيلية" (Israeli settlement) applied to cities such as Tel Aviv. You cant honestly expect me to believe you dont see the problem with labeling places outside of Israel as "Israeli cities". nableezy - 23:59, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
And I just saw that edit summary, so forgive me for this but fuck you. Dehumanizing Jews you say? Would you care to back up that accusation of racism or do you just plan leaving it stand without any type of evidence? When have I even said the word "Jew"? Did you not notice that I also said I would favor keeping the word Haredi instead of "ultra-Orthodox" or is that also dehumanizing to Jews. If you want to apologize for that fine, if not stay the fuck off my talk page. nableezy - 00:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

the 'F' word

Information.svg Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --Shuki (talk) 09:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

She accuses you of "dehumanizing Jews" and then gives you a warning for making personal attacks?!? She made the personal attack! Its like an alternate universe around here. Tiamuttalk 10:06, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I believe that in polite society saying things like 'ridiculous argument trying to support dehumanizing Jews' for no good reason whatsoever is sort of frowned upon and considered to be a personal attack. Perhaps Shuki is being ironic. Let's hope so. Sean.hoyland - talk 10:10, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Read the English: I did not accuse nableezy of dehumanizing. I implied that the editor's efforts are contributing to a general effort. On the other hand, that editor made a direct personal attack. As an admin, I expect you take a step back and to understand the difference. I made a strong accusation, no insults. The banner at the top of this page is nice, but this page is not an exception to WP rules. --Shuki (talk) 10:18, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
ridiculous argument trying to support dehumanizing Jews is a prsonal attack Shuki. You a) characterize the argument pejoratively by calling it "ridiculous" and b) speculate as to the editor's intentions in making the argument by stating that they are "trying to support dehumanizing Jews". If you cannot see how this is a personal attack, I don't think you are qualified to determine when you are met with one. Tiamuttalk 10:23, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm not an admin but if I were I would probably suggest that you read Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Palestine-Israel_articles#Discretionary_sanctions and play nice. Sean.hoyland - talk 10:34, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
No good reason is an apt description Sean. Let me set the stage for the vile, vicious, vexatious verb that I used. Shuki is apparently of the opinion that my opposition to labeling colonies built by Israel in occupied territory as "Israeli cities" and instead use the language used by the entire world, "Israeli settlement" as the primary descriptor for these places is "dehumanizing Jews". Apparently it is not a personal attack to call somebody a racist without cause. Somebody does that the only response that pops into my head (especially after many hours of not being able to smoke a cigarette, much less a joint) is "fuck you". It perhaps is not the best rejoinder, but it fits well, rolls of the tongue (or the fingers, and no I did not type that message with only one) easily and is perhaps the most efficient way of relaying my displeasure at being called a racist to Shuki. nableezy - 16:47, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
It would help if there more admin intervention in cases like this where editors interfere with the use of neutral internationally standard terminology like "Israeli settlement". At least bizarre unfounded personal attacks can be entertaining but it's tedious and a huge waste of time having to deal with fringe POV pushing like this over and over again. Sean.hoyland - talk 04:57, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Shuki, if you dont want to apologize for what you said, which I took as an insult, then do as I asked above and stay the fuck of my talk page. If you do I will gladly strike "fuck you". Not much to say besides that. nableezy - 13:56, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

almost put a note for you in parantheses

with ("sorry"), but then I remembered how such niceties can make you feel uncomfortable. Of course I care about what you think (and even what Okedem thinks sometimes). I just resorted to hyperbole because that discussion is really side issue and I'm sick of watching it suck up so many editors' energies. Cheers Nableezy. Tiamuttalk 16:18, 28 August 2009 (UTC)