User talk:Ronreisman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello, Ronreisman, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 19:44, 19 January 2013 (UTC)


There is a rule on wikipedia to prevent edit wars. It is called 1RR and means that people are limited to 1 revert per 24 h on any article. You didn't comply with that rule on the article about al-Husseini.

As pointed out by me and Nishidani, the fact he collaborated with the Nazis is already in the lead with even more details. There is no good reason to add this once more on the first line given this point is not important in the life of the Mufti.

On the contrary is a key point of the propaganda war launched by the Yishuv and after the Israeli authorities against the Palestinian nationalism before and after 1948 and therefore this emphase does not comply with NPoV.

Pluto2012 (talk) 12:38, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

@Pluto2012 , @Nishidani :The most historically significant aspects of a biography should be presented in the lead sentence. The current lead sentence is: "Haj Mohammed Effendi Amin el-Husseini .... was a Palestinian Arab nationalist and Muslim leader in Mandatory Palestine." This does not capture the two most important facts of this Grand Mufti's biography, ie he was 1) 'prominent in the 1948 Palestine War' and 2) 'vilified for his association with the Axis powers.' These points are made a couple of paragraphs after this lead sentence. The German connections are mentioned surrounded by a host of other less-significant biographical facts surround these more-significant facts, with oblique phrasing that does adequately indicate the fierce vilification of Haj Amin Husseini by pro-Zionists. The above two phrases (14 words total) would improve the article by communicating these two significant aspects of this man's biography to the readers. Ronreisman (talk) 23:37, 8 December 2013 (UTC)Ronreisman (talk) 23:43, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


You have broken 1RR: you should know better that edit-war with 3 other editors. I you do not rv, I will report you: You know the rules by now. Huldra (talk) 19:17, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

And you need to revert it all, if you are to avoid a report, Cheers, Huldra (talk) 19:22, 5 January 2014 (UTC)\

@Huldra Although my edits are not 'reverts' -- since they are not just cut-paste of previous edits, but actually have some new wording, in an attempt to improve the article. Nevertheless, given the infamous reputation y'all have on the internet. I'll take this as confirmation that y'all do, in fact, work together to suppress and distort facts in the service of propagandistic POV. This is very interesting, and thank you for bringing this to my attention. You sound like a spider, daring a fly to enter a trap. Thanks for the invitation.Ronreisman (talk) 19:57, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Complain on WP:AN/I[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Pluto2012 (talk) 11:41, 11 January 2014 (UTC)


Nishidani answered to you on the talk page and I answered too. We both disagree with you. Anyway, you forced your pov in the article. So I reverted you.

You have to find a consensus on the talk page. Pluto2012 (talk) 08:28, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bender6502.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Bender6502.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:06, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia[edit]

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Freda Kirchwey into The Nation. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. ............looks like some text from the Freda Kirchwey article got into The Nation article on the matter of the formation of Nation Associates

Feel free to check the talk page for The Nation. It wasn't that much text, so I don't think it's a major issue. Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 08:47, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

November 2015[edit]

Information icon Please do not add defamatory content to Wikipedia, as you did to Roger Waters, especially if it involves living persons. Thank you. RolandR (talk) 14:19, 15 November 2015 (UTC)


The following message was left on RolandR's talk page:

Eagles of Death Metal, Roger Waters, and civil & respectful editing practices[edit]

Dear RolandR,

You left the following message on my talk page:

Information icon Please do not add defamatory content to Wikipedia, as you did to Roger Waters, especially if it involves living persons. Thank you. RolandR (talk) 14:19, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

You comments are in reference to my edits, which you removed:

=== Conflict with VIctims of November 2015 Paris attacks===
In July 2015 Waters wrote a letter to the band Eagles of Death Metal protesting their decision to play in Israel. The band's co-founder and frontmanJesse Hughes responded publicly to Waters with "Fuck You!" in an anti-BDS rant at a concert in Tel Aviv, referring to Waters said : “Never waste your time worrying about what an asshole thinks about you.” [1] [2]
On November 13, 2015, Eagles of Death Metal played at Le Betaclan theater in Paris. The Bataclan had been targeted by BDS and pro-Palestinian activists for years due to the many pro-Israel events that were hosted at that venue. The show was one of six sites attacked by teams of terrorists. Over 89 people were murdered and around 200 injured during the attack on the Eagles of Death Metal show at the Bataclan.[3]

Your comment on this removal of content was:

(Reverted 2 edits by Ronreisman (talk): This is POV, synthesis, and an egregious breach of BLP. (TW))

You have falsely accused me of adding defamatory content to Wikipedia. This is a demonstrably false accusation, since 'defamation' is defined as a false statement, and the content I added is demonstrably true and substantiated by multiple reliable sources. Truth is the definitive defense against charges of libel or defamation, and so true content (such as the edits in question) can never be considered 'defamation.'

My edits represent the content of the cited reliable sources. These edits have not misrepresented, distorted, synthesized, or cherry-picked the contents of these sources and so your accusation that my edits are 'POV, synthesis, and an egregious breach of BLP' are not defensible, and constitute more false accusations.

Your accusations (ie that I added defamatory content) are false statements that (if believed) could harm my reputation, and therefore your message may be considered defamatory about me and the quality of these edits. More specifically, your disagreement 1) contradicts my edits without presenting an opposing case or supporting evidence; 2) responds to the tone of the writing without addressing the substance, factuality, and verifiability of the content; 3) contains multiple ad-hominem attacks, addressing the characteristics of the editor without addressing the any specific edit, wording, substance, or declarative statement; 4) contains inappropriate and uncivil name-calling, eg 'egregious breach of BLP.'

If you find anything in my edits that are improper then please point out the specific errors and we may discuss our differences in a civil, respectful, and productive dialog. Please do not hurl ad-hominem insults as a substitute for resolution by discussion and consensus-building.

In summary:

Please do not make false deprecatory statements about me in the future.

Please do not remove factual content that is both 1) clearly substantiated by multiple reliable sources and 2) relevant to the article's subject matter.

Please feel free to contact me via my talk page at your convenience.

Thank you very much.

Ronreisman (talk) 01:57, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration alert[edit]

Commons-emblem-notice.svg This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Notification of RfC on Eagles of Death Metal at Content Resolution Noticeboard[edit]

A discussion of the content dispute about content proposed for the Eagles of Death Metal article, in which you are involved (and named in the RfC) has been opened at

Ronreisman (talk) 18:51, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

I will do this for you!!!--Moxy (talk) 19:16, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

  1. ^ "Concert review: The Eagles of Death Metal". Jerusalem Post. Retrieved July 12, 2015. 
  2. ^ "Eagles Of Death Metal at Tel Aviv - I Only Want You" ,
  3. ^ "Attack at Paris's Bataclan: 'two or three men began shooting blindly at crowd'". The Guardian. 13 November 2015. Retrieved 13 November 2015.