Hamada2

Better late than never?

Welcome! Hello, Hamada2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck or looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Help Desk, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers: User pages The five pillars of Wikipedia Wikipedia in eight words How to edit a page (or, the quick cheatsheet version) Help pages Tutorial How to write a great article Manual of Style Glossary What Wikipedia is not Assume good faith Wikiquette Sandbox (this page is for testing) I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, or ask the people around you for help -- good Wikipedians don't bite the newcomers. Keep an open mind and listen for advice, but don't hesitate to be bold when editing! If you'd like to respond to this message, or ask any questions, feel free to leave a message at my talk page! Once you've become a more experienced Wikipedian, you may wish to take a moment to visit these pages: Wikipedia:Community portal Wikipedia:WikiProjects Best of luck to you, and happy editing! Luna Santin 10:40, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Image licensing

Hello, I notice you uploaded an image that was a collage of other works under pd-self. This is inappropriate - the collage is not the entirety of the work. I have deleted the image - please be careful with images you upload in the future. --Improv 16:14, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:EgyptdwfwewefwfweTombWall.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:EgyptdwfwewefwfweTombWall.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 19:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, that was a mistake. I uploaded the same image twice by accident. I put a tag for deletion on this one, thank you. Hamada2 19:58, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I deleted both photos. I suggest you avoid uploading from bigphoto.com since they have terms that we just cannot abide by. We are not going to pay 100 USD in order to keep watermarks off of images. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 20:20, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! Let's talk

Hi Hamada2. You made this edit at the Arab diaspora page. I was wondering if you wouldn't mind explaining how "contested" is more neutral or accurate than "complex relationship" to describe the links between Egyptian and Arab identity. Maybe we could work together on a third alternative agreeable to both of us by discussing it more on the talk page? I welcome your comments at Talk:Arab diaspora. Tiamut 17:15, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi! You must understand that this identification is contested. But let me explain a few things. Before Nasser almost nobody in Egypt identified as Arab. Even today, most Egyptians mean people from the Arabian Peninsula, Jordan, Iraq etc when they say "Arab". There are some places in Egypt that have "arab" or "el-Arab" as part of its name. This is where the true Arabs, the bedwins, who seldom intermarried with Egyptians were concentrated and many still live there. This doesn't deny those Egyptians who identify as Arab their right to do so. Indeed many do. Actually if you watch Egyptian television, you will find this subject discussed on talk shows with debate panels and things like that. We have to mention that it is contested to be fair and respect everyone's opinion. Thank you for your comments and for the welcome (actually I've been contributing in small doses for a while). Hamada2 00:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Hamada. I appreciate you sharing your personal perspective. I've been to Egypt and have a lot of friends there and my experience of the situation is somewhat different than your own. However, even if all of what you said is true, I'm not sure that it is entirely relevant to an article on the Arab diaspora. The subject of that article in Arabs in the Diaspora and not whether or not Egyptians consider themselves to be Arab or not. There are reliable sources cited in that article that cover the subject of Egyptians Arabs in the diaspora. The Egyptians who don't identify as Arab are not the subject of that article. So I don't think the footnote really belongs there in the first place. People can click on the wikilink to Egyptians and can a fuller coverage of the identity issues there. Thanks for your comments.Tiamut 00:17, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

See the article says this "Most Arabs of the Americas are of either Lebanese, Syrian or Egyptian extraction". I don't think this is a neutral statement. There is no choice but to mention that many Egyptians would not agree with that. But if we remove that statement, there wouldn't be a problem. There are many reliable sources cited at the identity link also. Thanks. Hamada2 00:27, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't see how that sentence is not neutral. It's a fact that most of the Arabs in the Americas are of Lebanese, Syrian or Egyptian extraction. The article does not say that most Egyptians are Arabs. You're reading that into this statement. I don't think it's appropriate to put a note responding to a claim that is not being made. The issue of Egyptian identity is a complex one, best discussed in the article on Egypt and not in an article on the Arab diaspora. Egyptians who do not identify as Arabs, are not Arabs, but they are not the subject of this article.

On a personal note, I have to say further that all of my experiences with Egyptians in real life have indicated that they do consider themselves to be Araba. My uncle is an Egyptian Arab Copt, and while he is prejudiced again Islam, he has no problem with identifying as Arab. He speaks no other language than Arabic, after all. My aunt is also Egyptian Arab and would be mighty pissed if someone questioned her Arab-ness. In conclusion, I think you need to fair here and realize that there are a lot of Egyptians who might be offended by not being called Arab. This debate is not the subject on an article on the Arab diaspora in any case. Tiamut 13:04, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

But it implies that all of the Egyptians in the Americas are Arabs. Many and many of the Egyptian diaspora do not consider themselves Arab. The article doesn't need to discuss Egyptian identity to respond to the claim that they are "Arab". You put a source that claims many Arabs in the Americas are of Egyptian extraction, someone else put another source questioning the claim that they are Arab. That's fair and neutral. Did you know that in America the Amazigh and the Kurds are classified as Arabs and part of the Arab diaspora? Refer to the US Census. If someone puts that claim in the article, someone else will respond that they are not Arabs. Wikipedia expresses neutrality on controversial topics, not one view. As far as personal notes go, I have to say that I am from a religious Egyptian Muslim family where almost everyone doesn't view themselves as Arab and are offended when they are. The word "Egyptian Arab" in my own ears sounds like an oxymoron. Even Egyptians who believe in the Arab identity acknowledge that Egyptians generally view their ethnicity differently from the Arabs. But personal experiences can't be included in the articles. Hamada2 17:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Arabs

Are you sure that we are in agreement? : (

..'cause my view is that Copts (and possibly other Egyptians) ARE NOT Arabs. They can be mentioned, but this should be taken into account (IMHO).

If we truly are in agreement, then I will go ahead with r.v. it back to before (my bad).

...is that your opinion also???

~ Troy 00:54, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

...ok, so now I see that we have an agreement here. Thanks,

~ Troy 01:03, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

WORK?

What you called work is a couple of trolls who hoaxing. NOT EVERY ONE WHO LIVES IN IRAQ are from the ancient babylonians beside Iraqis is not a ethnic group. this man placed the ethnobox. bye Irqirq 19:29, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Wish to help?

You are good at editing Arab ethnic groups, why not help out here[1]?, thanks in advance Nick10000 11:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry mate, I can't be of assisstance. Hamada2 16:47, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Re. Egyptian people

Thanks for the heads up. Yes, the report was filed correctly since s/he violated 3RR after being warned. I'm sorry to see it's come to this. Perhaps s/he will choose to utilize the talk page should s/he decide to discuss this further. — Zerida 20:51, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

December 2007

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 HOURS in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for for violating 3RR on Talk:Egyptians. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. nat.utoronto 20:53, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Hamada2 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I'm sorry if I caused trouble. I know about the 3 revert rule on Wikipedia but I didn't know you could get blocked if you only reverted someone three times. Unless you count my first edit which wasn't reverting anything, I was removing a tag. I wish I had known that. You should know though that person always causes trouble for pages and users. Other people than me were reverting him also because he disrupts a lot. Anyway sorry for the trouble.

Decline reason:

Yes, you can be blocked for only three reverts. To describe your first edit as simply removing a template is, at this point, a bit disingenuous. The other user gave clear reasons for his reverts in his edit summaries which you could have heeded and attempted to discuss on the talk page, whatever others think of him. Instead you continued to revert. You may not necessarily have been blocked for a 3RR violation, but you certainly did disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

If this user was a troublemaker, then you should have been especially wary of the potential for giving him the ammo for a 3RR. Essentially you were edit warring, which is blockable (and is in fact what's cited in the block message). Maybe other remedies should have been tried — an AN/I, page protection — but you bear some blame for letting that situation develop to where it did. Daniel Case (talk) 02:33, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Egyptians

An article that you have been involved in editing, Egyptians, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Egyptians. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 10:14, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Sherine.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Sherine.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Mosmof (talk) 06:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
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) 16:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)