Open main menu

Contents

Balfour Declaration GOCE Copy-EditEdit


CfD nomination of Category:People of Arab nationalityEdit

Category:People of Arab nationality has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page.

Request for CommentEdit

Onceinawhile. There is a WP:RfC on the Talk-Page of the article Husan. Please feel free to respond.Davidbena (talk) 05:18, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

AfDEdit

Nomination of Donald Trump's handshakes for deletionEdit

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Donald Trump's handshakes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donald Trump's handshakes until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Sleyece (talk) 16:08, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Donald Trump's handshakesEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Donald Trump's handshakes 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! Yoninah (talk) 00:19, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Donald Trump and handshakesEdit

 On 8 September 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Donald Trump and handshakes, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Donald Trump's handshake (pictured) with Emmanuel Macron at the Bastille Day celebrations was 29 seconds long? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Donald Trump and handshakes), 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.

Alex ShihTalk 00:03, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Original Barnstar
Thank you for creating Donald Trump and handshakes!Zigzig20s (talk) 10:01, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Donald Trump and handshakes for deletionEdit

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Donald Trump and handshakes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donald Trump and handshakes (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. KMF (talk) 00:48, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Balfour Declaration FAC comments and editsEdit

Hello, Onceinawhile – Thank you for your very kind comment at the FAC page. I was sorry to see that the nomination was archived without any decision made, but at least you can re-nominate Balfour Declaration in a few weeks. That will give you time to work on it.

[moved article comments to Wikipedia:Peer review/Balfour Declaration/archive2]

 – Corinne (talk) 03:18, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Re:Balfour DeclaratiomEdit

Greetings.
I would surely to give some comments in the peer review. But currently for this week I am a little busy, and I would review it after this week. RRD (talk) 03:53, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Some things to look out for in refining proseEdit

Hello, Onceinawhile – I saw your comment at the Wikipedia:Peer review/Balfour Declaration/archive2#Comment from nominator. I do not participate in FA reviews, but I thought these things might help you to refine the prose and formatting in this and future articles:

  • Avoid using the same word in close proximity (and this includes different forms of the same verb); if you see any, try to substitute a synonym for one of them;
  • look for repetition of the same sentence structure, particularly in consecutive sentences; if you see this, try to vary the sentence structure;
  • see if there are any adjective clauses in which the verb is the verb to be and either a past participle (studied, seen) or a present participle (studying, seeing) ("which is", "which was", "which were", "that is", "that was", "that were", "who is", "who was", "who were") that could be reduced to a participial phrase (i.e., by removing "which is", etc.) without losing meaning or clarity;
  • as you read from the beginning to the end of the article, see that each sentence flows smoothly and clearly from the sentence before it, as much as possible; if you detect any significant conceptual breaks, particularly within a paragraph, try to make the connection clearer; this is often accomplished with:
  • using a transitional word or phrase at the beginning of a sentence;
  • repeating a key word or phrase from the previous sentence; or
  • adding a missing detail;
  • making sure the date format is consistent throughout the article;
  • making sure the spelling for the selected variant of English is consistent;
  • making sure the dashes are consistent (see MOS:DASH): use either a spaced en-dash or an unspaced em-dash, but consistently;
  • look out for weasel words and Words to watch and substitute better words;
  • avoid using contractions (isn't, didn't) – write the words out in full;
  • write out acronyms in full the first time they are mentioned, with the acronym in parentheses after the full name; thereafter, the acronym can be used;
  • in image captions, be sure not to put a period/full stop at the end if it is not a complete sentence, unless the caption contains more than one phrase, with each ending in a period/full stop; and
  • use the blockquote template {{quote|.....}} for quotes of about 40 words or more (see MOS:QUOTE).

I hope this is helpful.  – Corinne (talk) 17:25, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

    • Replying to Corinne's ping: sure, this is helpful advice, and you're welcome to highlight and link it. But note that, depending on what "proximity" and "sentence structure" mean, it wouldn't be unreasonable for someone to say that this advice violates its first two points in many places. I think this advice is well-written, so perhaps the first two points could be made clearer. - Dank (push to talk) 23:39, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your thoughts, Dank. I see what you mean: for example, using the phrase "sentence structure" twice in the same point. However, do you think the fact that this is not really an essay but a list of suggestions makes it a little different? I'll work on it, though, to minimize repetition. Where would Onceinawhile link this, when I've finished going over it?  – Corinne (talk) 01:26, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
I guess I'm just saying that it's hard to give advice that general that people don't wind up misusing ... unless they knew it in the first place. - Dank (push to talk) 01:32, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Again ... I'm not knocking your first two points, I just think that the readers who need the advice the most will understand it the least. There's nothing wrong with repeating the words "verb", "which", "sentence", "sure", etc., if they need to be repeated. Other words probably shouldn't be repeated (particularly if the same word or even the same root is used in different senses). It's hard to teach this stuff, or even understand it. - Dank (push to talk) 02:00, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

BalfourEdit

Thanks for your reply on my user space page! Do you wish to continue the conversation there or should I move it to the talk page for Balfour_Declaration or the Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates page? The page is very good as it is, the small flaws I believe I have detected should not detract from that! ImTheIP (talk) 09:55, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

JP articleEdit

Obviously not a reliable source for history, but interesting anyway: http://www.jpost.com/Jerusalem-Report/British-Pride-Lord-Balfour-discusses-his-great-uncles-declaration-505824 . Zerotalk 00:09, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

@Zero0000: that’s interesting, thanks for sharing. I remember he wrote to the NYT earlier this year as well. Most of the coverage appeared to report only one side of his comments, despite the fact that he is clearly trying to be balanced.
With all the public discussion on this topic in the build up to the centenary, it is a shame to see the two sides still talking past one another. 100 years later and the two narratives on the event are still so far apart. I hope our article does a good job at being truly balanced.
By the way, while you’re here I have a quick question for you that I’ve been mulling over. Dank posted an interesting challenge at the FAC, on whether the BD really is the “origin” of the conflict. Many scholars believe it is, because it supercharged Zionism to such an extent, sending it on a collision course. But on the other hand, who knows what would have happened without it, and “supercharging” is not the same as “creating”.
”Origin” is definitely sourceable to RS, but perhaps there’s a better word? Onceinawhile (talk) 07:53, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Re sourcing. Is this in the article? Efraim Halevy,Balfour 100 | ‘Mack’: Aaron Aaronsohn, the NILI intelligence network and the Balfour Declaration Fathom Summer / 2017 (I followed up the JP article). My only personal reaction to it was that this stuff is untimely, given Erdogan's return to Ottoman ambitions, and the potential implications for the Jewish community in Turkey.
As to 'origins', no historical event can have a single originating factor. History is conjunctural, a crystallization of interlocking elements, though singularities can can turn nudge to shove. BD fertilized or sowed further seed into a project, but only post-WW2 American and European willingness to wash their hands of their responsibilities for the Holocaust created the 1947 sine qua non, fore the simple reason that at that latter date only 6% of the land was in Zionist hands, and war was necessary to complete the project of a national territorial base.Nishidani (talk) 08:01, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

PreciousEdit

Palestine

Thank you for quality articles around Palestine, such as preparing Balfour Declaration for a timely mainpage appearance, for Criticism of the Israeli government, Timeline of the name "Palestine" and Kadesh inscriptions, for improving the timeline of Jerusalem, - once in while it needs to be said: you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:20, 2 November 2017 (UTC)


  The Barnstar of Diligence
In recognition of your diligently tenacious pursuit of scholarly purpose, erudition and method in driving the Balfour Declaration article through to the outstanding quality we have today, in the face of intransigent obtusity and obstructive nescience.

Awarded by Nishidani (talk) 20:34, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1763 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:38, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
  The Original Barnstar
For your Herculean efforts in bringing the Balfour Declaration to FA status, well done! Huldra (talk) 20:59, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Jewish and Arab-owned regions in mandatory PalestineEdit

Why aren't you accepting the sources that back up the edit? We already have consensus on the talk page that the map needs to include both Jewish and Arab lands in order to not be misleading. Dank Chicken (talk) 22:34, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Unless you answer on the template talk page in the forseeable future, I'll revert to my edit. Dank Chicken (talk) 16:08, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter messageEdit

 Hello, Onceinawhile. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Jerusalem revertEdit

I left a message to you at Talk:Jerusalem#Notes. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 10:42, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Mausoleum of Abu HurairaEdit

 On 11 December 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mausoleum of Abu Huraira, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a tomb (pictured) in Yavne is claimed as the site of burial of Abu Hurairah by Muslims and Gamaliel II by Jews, despite both claims being highly unlikely? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mausoleum of Abu Huraira. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Mausoleum of Abu Huraira), 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.

Alex Shih (talk) 00:01, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Balfour Declaration revertEdit

@Onceinawhile: Regarding your note.

"You might read the third of these again - the “Jordan is Palestine” trope seems to have come up again in one of your comments."
The notion that "Jordan is Palestine" is not a "trope" if one is talking about the period in which Palestine was being organized into a definitive, defined territory under British mandate. There are ample sources to back it up.
1. See, for instance, Article 25 of the 1922 Palestine Mandate document (also referred to in the Trans-Jordan Memorandum):
"In the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined..."
This is a clear indication that the Jordan River was not, as yet, seen as the eastern boundary of Palestine, and that Palestine was seen as including land beyond the Jordan.
2. See also the terminology used in the Interim Report on the Civil of Administration of Palestine, during the period 1st July, 1920 - 30th June, 1921.
"Included in the area of the Palestine Mandate is the territory of Trans-Jordania."
"When Palestine west of the Jordan was occupied by the British Army...", which implies that Palestine includes territory east of the Jordan.
3. See further the Palestine Order in Counicil, August 22, which explicitly citing Trans-Jordan as a territory of Palestine, while making distinction for administrative purpose. https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/C7AAE196F41AA055052565F50054E656
"This Order In Council Shall Not Apply To Such Parts Of The Territory Comprised In Palestine To The East Of The Jordan And The Dead Sea As Shall Be Defined By Order Of The High Commissioner."
4. See further the British White Paper of June 1922, regarding the British pledge for Arab independence:
"The whole of Palestine west of the Jordan was thus excluded from Sir. Henry McMahon's pledge."
A clear indication that Palestine did include territory EAST of the Jordan.
5. See further pg. 28 of the 1937 British royal Report on Palestine:
"...Abdullah, had become Emir of the part of historic Palestine east of the Jordan which was allotted under the name of Trans-Jordan to the area of Arab independence, in accordance with the "McMahon Pledge"".
http://biblio-archive.unog.ch/Dateien/CouncilMSD/C-495-M-336-1937-VI_EN.pdf
6. The actual fixing of a boundary within the Palestine Mandate was as an ADMINISTRATIVE division, between the area to be granted for Arab indepndence and the area in which the Jewish National Home was to be established.
See, thus pg. 38 of the above report:
"The field in which the Jewish National Home was to be established was understood, at the time of the Balfour Declaration, to be the whole of historic Palestine, and the Zionists were seriously disappointed when Trans-Jordan was cut away from that field under Article 25. This was done, as has been seen, in obedience to the McMahon Pledge, which was antecedent to the Balfour Declaration."
7. See further in that regard the Report on Palestine Administration, 1922.
https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/A682CABF739FEBAA052565E8006D907C
"Following a memorandum presented by His Majesty's Government in September to the League of Nations, a resolution was passed by the Council of the League to exclude Transjordan from the Articles of the Mandate which concern the Holy Places and the measures to be taken in concert with the Jewish Agency for the establishment of a Jewish National Home.
The Order in Council also contains a provision that it shall not apply to the Transjordan territory."
8. See further the explanation of Herbert Samuel for the reason behind the administrative separation between Palestine and Transjordan, i.e. in order to satisfy both the Balfour Declaration and promises made to Hussein for Arab independence.
https://www.jta.org/1936/12/20/archive/sir-herbert-samuel-explains-separation-of-palestine-transjordan
Some relevant maps:
1. A map of Palestine from 1901 showing territory in Transjordan included in the area of Palestine. http://www.britishempire.co.uk/images2/palestinemap1901.jpg
2. See also the map of Palestine in the 1911 Edition of Encyclopedia and the text of the article regarding bounndaries.
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica/Palestine
"Eastward there is no such definite border. The River Jordan, it is true, marks a line of delimitation between Western and Eastern Palestine; but it is practically impossible to say where the latter ends and the Arabian desert begins."
3. A British Cabinet map from 1921, showing Palestine incorporating some area beyond the Jordan.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/Middle_East_in_1921%2C_UK_Government_map%2C_Cab24-120-cp21-2607.jpg
4. A map presented by T.E. Lawrence at 1918, showing a thin sliver of Trans-Jordanian territory included in Palestine.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/Lawrence_of_Arabia%27s_map%2C_presented_to_the_Eastern_Committee_of_the_War_Cabinet_in_November_1918.jpg
Please let me know if you require more references in support of the fact that during the period in question Palestine WAS seen as including Trans-Jordanian territory, and that the establishment of a boundary at the Jordan River was an administrative boundary within Mandatory Palestine demarcating the area of the Jewish National Home from the autonomous Arab territory in Transjordan.
Jacob D (talk) 16:43, 9 January 2018 (UTC)Jacob D
I have commented at your talk page. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:31, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 18Edit

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Taxon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Taxonomy (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.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Biblical Researches in PalestineEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Biblical Researches in Palestine 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! Meanderingbartender (talk) 14:13, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Shapira ScrollEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Shapira Scroll 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! Yoninah (talk) 19:04, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Shapira ScrollEdit

 On 11 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Shapira Scroll, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that although its discoverer committed suicide after it was declared a forgery in 1883, the Shapira Scroll may be a Dead Sea Scroll after all? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Shapira Scroll. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Shapira Scroll), 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.

Alex Shih (talk) 00:03, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

You've been specially selected.Edit

Hello. Take a look at these golden contributions: one and two. I double checked the sources and I don't see anything wrong with these edits but unfortunately they were reverted and quickly suppressed with inadequate reasoning. I would undo the reverts but obviously I don't have sufficient permissions to do it. 24.114.99.92 (talk) 07:25, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Historylover4/Archive I haven’t looked into it but this concluded sock puppetry. If this is incorrect you should appeal it. If it is correct, you should repend and ask for forgiveness. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:32, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
It's hopeless, I've been forever banned from here just like we've been banned from our homeland for doing no wrong but simply because some beguiler made a false accusation and said that I should not be here when even he knew that he was playing a dirty trick. The admins take his word no matter how ridiculous and I have no voice. Historylover is probably some long lost user from over 5 years ago but the admins were quick on the ban trigger and won't listen at all; I don't even like history. Anyways, like I said, that is a lost cause since it seems there was a conspiracy against me from the beginning. The real cause is to direct your attention to the actual contributions themselves so that you can make use of the information within those edits. Take a look at them, they are not long. 24.114.96.203 (talk) 07:54, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
There was some terminology in your post immediately above which could be interpreted as racist. Please could you reconsider. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:59, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
Okay but have you taken a look? 24.114.106.70 (talk) 17:07, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
I have taken a look at the SPI investigation, and the edit diffs you provided.
It looks to me like the ban in 2016 was unreasonable. You should have appealed it, rather than creating your own sock-puppets. To work in Wikipedia, you must work with Wikipedia, and embrace the community, with all its faults. Imperfections exist in every person you have a relationship with in your life, and they exist equally in Wikipedia. Treat Wikipedia as you would any group of people in real life, face-to-face.
Your edits are sensible. Throwing them at editors like me won't work though. It takes time and patience to get controversial articles to an NPOV position. We all have time and patience, but we pick our own battles. One day maybe i'll wade into this particular sub-topic, but not now.
I am worried by the wording in your earlier comment, although I am glad you removed it. At best it suggests that you may not yet have the maturity for this arena, and perhaps that you think there is something tribal to this. There is not. The spectrum of editors here is much more accurately correlated between progressive-minded people who support the little guy and conservative-minded people who support the status quo, with most people believing they are supporting NPOV. Onceinawhile (talk) 19:56, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
You still don't get it, I never had an account in 2016; the first account that I ever created was User:Dr.Greyhawk in 2018. They falsely accused me of being a sockpuppet of someone from 2013. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they already unjustly banned 2 or 3 separate people in the past based on the same false accusation. I did appeal the ban but the admins who are trigger happy with the bans were too cocky with their judgment and didn't listen at all. The wording of my earlier comment reflects reality, don't give me the "maturity" lecture because I'm way past that point of maturity. If you knew only a quarter of what I know on the subject you woudn't dare say that. You don't think people are gaming the system while you try to act all impartial? Playing every dirty trick to hide inconvenient facts while you are over-concerned about POV? It's people like you who set us back. I never broke any rules and I'm not telling you to break any rules either but you gotta know when to give a push. Anyways, it seems as though you choose to waste your time looking into the SPI rather than the important matters that I am trying to being your attention to. The least you could do is copy/paste the edits to the talk page for discussion. Either way, I will find another way to break the censorship. 24.114.103.3 (talk) 22:57, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

MessageEdit

Thank you. The dyk got 28,000 views! [1] Makeandtoss (talk) 12:10, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Biblical Researches in PalestineEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Biblical Researches in Palestine 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! Yoninah (talk) 20:50, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of McMahon–Hussein CorrespondenceEdit

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article McMahon–Hussein Correspondence 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 Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 23:40, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Biblical Researches in PalestineEdit

 On 29 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Biblical Researches in Palestine, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that "the errors of many generations" were said to have been "forever buried" in the footnotes of the 1841 travelogue Biblical Researches in Palestine? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Biblical Researches in Palestine. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Biblical Researches in Palestine), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

HiEdit

Thanks for starting Biblical Researches in Palestine! (Hint: Conder and Kitcheners Survey of Western Palestine also could do with an article...)

Also, I have several drafts which I don't seem to be able to finish:

Please feel free to work on anyone of them (Deir Hajla is probably most important, as it has an article in 4 other wikis) Huldra (talk) 23:46, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Morrison-Grady Plan and London Conference of 1946–47Edit

  Hello! Your submission of Morrison-Grady Plan and London Conference of 1946–47 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! SounderBruce 02:20, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of McMahon–Hussein CorrespondenceEdit

The article McMahon–Hussein Correspondence you nominated as a good article has passed  ; see Talk:McMahon–Hussein Correspondence 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 Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 23:41, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

For Your InformationEdit

I thought this might interest you. See Palestine-Israel articles. The idea here is to remain neutral as much as possible in this arena of conflicting opinions. All the best.Davidbena (talk) 22:41, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Friendly reminderEdit

In all articles related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including the seemingly more neutral article Palestine (region), Wikipedia policies are clear that if an edit is reverted by another editor, its original author may not restore it within 24 hours of the revert.Davidbena (talk) 23:46, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

@Davidbena: thanks for this. Are you sure it's 24 hours since the revert, or 24 hours since the original edit? I went back to look at the WP:ARBPIA3 discussion (see here) and it is not clear. I had assumed that the "spirit" of the rule is to communicate that an original edit is treated like a revert in terms of the 1RR timeline. So then it would be 24 hours since the original edit. Onceinawhile (talk) 15:45, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Well, I'm not sure about that. When I'm in doubt, I usually follow the more stringent rule. BTW: Do you think that we can reach an agreement about Josephus and what his intent was, when writing about Judea and Palestine? Just curious.Davidbena (talk) 17:22, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
@Davidbena: yes I do, so long as we don't try to solve it in isolation. Both words have at least two possible interpretations. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:01, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Is there a way to mention both constructs in the "Palestinian (region)" article?
Yes and we should do the same for Judea. Let’s agree on the details at Talk:Timeline of the name "Palestine", and then use that as a base to copyedit the main article. Onceinawhile (talk) 21:16, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Harrison ReportEdit

 On 14 May 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Harrison Report, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that an American report on the refugee camps in post-World War II Europe led to an inquiry regarding Palestine? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Harrison Report. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Harrison Report), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Morrison–Grady PlanEdit

 On 14 May 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Morrison–Grady Plan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that both the Morrison–Grady Plan and the Bevin Plan presented at the 1946–47 London Conference on Palestine were rejected by all parties? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Morrison–Grady Plan), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:02, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

DYK for London Conference of 1946–47Edit

 On 14 May 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article London Conference of 1946–47, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that both the Morrison–Grady Plan and the Bevin Plan presented at the 1946–47 London Conference on Palestine were rejected by all parties? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, London Conference of 1946–47), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:02, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Bevin PlanEdit

 On 14 May 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bevin Plan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that both the Morrison–Grady Plan and the Bevin Plan presented at the 1946–47 London Conference on Palestine were rejected by all parties? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Bevin Plan), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:02, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation pagesEdit

Hello, Onceinawhile. When you created the disambiguation page British Mandate of Palestine (disambiguation) and then redirected various existing page titles to that page, you may not have been aware of WP:FIXDABLINKS, which says:

When creating disambiguation pages, fix all resulting mis-directed links.
Before moving an article to a qualified name (in order to create a disambiguation page at the base name, to move an existing disambiguation page to that name, or to redirect that name to a disambiguation page), click on What links here to find all of the incoming links. Repair all of those incoming links to use the new article name.

It would be a great help if you would check the other Wikipedia articles that contain links to "British Mandate of Palestine" and all the other titles you redirected to the disambiguation page, and fix them to take readers to the correct article. Thanks. R'n'B (call me Russ) 10:30, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

I think the larger issue is changing all the redirects to point to the dab. I would think Mandatory Palestine the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here, and given the dab only has two links, hatnotes would be better. ~ Amory (utc) 10:35, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
@R'n'B and Amorymeltzer: I did exactly that this morning - fixing all the redirects where possible. I fixed a dozen or so redirects, so they now have no articles redirecting to them. The only redirects I left to point to disambiguation are those with too many to fix in a short time - they need to be fixed over time. They haven’t been fixed in 6 years since the article split because they had instead been randomly allocated to each of the two primary articles. There is no primary article here – it’s equivalent to the difference between the Magna Carta and Plantagenet England, just with similar names – and the 2012 article split caused many of the links to be directed to the wrong place. Onceinawhile (talk) 14:03, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Also note the thread I started at Talk:British Mandate of Palestine (disambiguation) earlier today. Onceinawhile (talk) 14:07, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I started doing this using DisamAssist. There are still c.2,000 left to go.... Onceinawhile (talk) 05:35, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the Vice articleEdit

That you linked to on the Gaza Protests page. It was very interesting.

I would've just replied on what you wrote, but couldn't find the option to do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eyal3400 (talkcontribs) 23:17, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

It struck meEdit

rewatching the classic film The Sand Pebbles with Steve McQueen this evening, that the hero is rather like being an editor on Wikipedia. One identifies with him, but the wiki synthesis says he is an outsider. Well, no, he is a person with what viewers would identify as having normal, decent human feelings, and it is precisely this which makes him an outsider, since these are dysfunctional in the small and great world where he lives and acts. Regards Nishidani (talk) 21:00, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

@Nishidani: i just read the plot - it seems McQueen’s character’s humanity means he falls between two stools. Entirely agree that that is always the case when taking an intellectual view on a nationalist debate. Ethnic nationalism, as a base instinct which appeals to and manipulates its adherents into immoral actions, is well represented here by those editors who refuse to listen to the other side of the discussion and/or willingly push propaganda and manipulate sources, for the perceived benefit of “their side”. And there are just too many of those. Onceinawhile (talk) 21:23, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
I don't think people are nationalist by nature. Nationalism's evil is that it reengineers people's sentiments, which include the capacity to understand other people stricken by a plight, to make their feelings inert to any grief experienced by outsiders. In the mid-1930s, even where a certain cultural anti-Semitism existed in German rural areas, the Nazis experienced problems with local police and folks when orders came through to harass Jews. It took some time to get them to behave 'correctly' i.e., getting fear for their own lives to kick in and thereby cancel out the spontaneous neighbourly sentiments many (by no means all) in certain towns felt. This sensibility is not 'intellectual'. Nishidani (talk) 10:51, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Civility Barnstar
For your graceful and dignified response to an unwarranted and ugly little outburst of emotion. Irondome (talk) 21:34, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

A sock-puppet investigation you may be interested inEdit

A sock-puppet investigation concerning three users who have been participating in discussions at Talk:Israel has been started here. As you have also been involved in discussions with these users, you may have something to add. You are welcome to participate. Veritycheck✔️ (talk) 00:58, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Your recent revertsEdit

You reverted my edits on Talk:Israel with the only explanation being "please stop". What does that mean? Mithrandir the Grey (talk) 15:42, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

MeatpuppetryEdit

With regard to your note here and your edits to the George Bell page, please do see WP:MEAT and please be aware that the community does not look favorably on meatpuppetry for banned editors. Jytdog (talk) 14:10, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

@Jytdog: I ask that you reconsider the above. I find the insinuation insulting (I consider the post to be casting aspertions rather than informing of policy, since my long history here means that it is reasonable to assume that by now I am well aware of WP:MEAT). Meatpuppets don’t repost the original canvassing, and nor do they make good faith edits which develop both sides of the question. Onceinawhile (talk) 15:01, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
There is no insinuation. You have done what you have done (no aspersions, but rather diffs) and I am asking you to be mindful. Jytdog (talk) 15:27, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Copyright problemEdit

Please see Israeli foreign aid, now listed at WP:CP. Can you cast any light? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:02, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Justlettersandnumbers: the website link shown is a wikipedia mirror of Foreign relations of Israel. Perhaps the copyvio automatic detector is malfunctioning? Onceinawhile (talk) 21:10, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
I've answered on the talk-page there; and no, I'm human, I really am (I can pick out the street signs in a captcha and everything). Actually, someone else noticed the apparent copyvio – and who can blame him/her, there was no attribution for the copying. Could you kindly remedy that? Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:51, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi @Justlettersandnumbers: you're right and that's fair. I've responded and added attribution on the talk page. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:01, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nominationEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Working Definition of Antisemitism at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 14:44, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Amakuru: I believe you moved the nomination per your comment on the nom page. Now that the links have been fixed, please could you let me know what to do regarding this notification? Onceinawhile (talk) 10:08, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi, sorry I forgot about this after you mentioned that you had fixed it. I can repromote if for you and slot it back into a queue for you , but I'm not at a computer now so it'll have to be later tonight. Otherwise maybe request it at the DYK talk page. Thanks.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:21, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Working Definition of AntisemitismEdit

 On 2 November 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Working Definition of Antisemitism, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the inter-governmental Working Definition of Antisemitism has generated controversy over its inclusion of examples of criticism of Israel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Working Definition of Antisemitism. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Working Definition of Antisemitism), 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

AEEdit

[2] --Shrike (talk) 20:12, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanctionEdit

 The following sanction now applies to you:

You are banned for 3 months from editing anything relating to Arab–Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted

You have been sanctioned for the reasons provided in response to this arbitration enforcement request.

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Palestine-Israel articles#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. AGK ■ 21:57, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi, just to tell you...Edit

  The Original Barnstar
Your contributions here are greatly are appreciated. Huldra (talk) 23:54, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

You are one of the best editors I've encountered in my 16 years in Wikipedia. Hang in there. Zerotalk 01:50, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Re. Your topic banEdit

I've been following the situation since I first saw it pop up at Arbitration Enforcement, as well as your subsequent exchange at AGK's talk page. Honestly, I really think you should file an appeal at AE. It is clear to me that AGK stands by his decision and will not change his mind – further attempts at persuading him will be an exercise in futility. There's nothing in policy that restricts you from submitting a cogent, well-reasoned appeal for other third-party administrators to consider. I can't guarantee that it will be successful; in fact, I'm pretty sure that the overwhelming majority of appeals are declined. Even the more successful ones usually result in a reduced sanction as opposed to vacating the original decision. But there is no harm in trying, and I really think that you do have a case to argue. Kurtis (talk) 07:34, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Topic ban violationEdit

You cannot discuss Israel-Arab conlict including in ARCA I suggest you self-revert. --Shrike (talk) 16:34, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

user:Shrike, According to AGK (see User_talk:AGK#Topic_ban?) it is not a topic ban violation, Huldra (talk) 21:26, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I was pointed here by Huldra. For whatever it's worth, I do not think this is a breach. That particular ARCA deals with the remedy generally. A narrower thread not dealing with 'meta' questions would be a breach. Indeed, the perspective of an editor who has first-hand experience of the remedy 'in action' is a valuable addition to the process. AGK ■ 21:29, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
I have stricken my comment accordingly --Shrike (talk) 07:10, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Topic ban liftedEdit

Hi Onceinawhile, pursuant to consensus at AE, I have vacated your topic ban from the Arab-Israeli conflict. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 08:05, 15 November 2018 (UTC) @L235: Thank you Kevin. Best regards, Onceinawhile (talk) 12:28, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

  • See? What did I tell you?

    Happy editing. :) Kurtis (talk) 02:48, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

History of Ottoman PalestineEdit

Hi. Both History of Israel and History of Palestine have summaries about important events that ocurred during the Ottoman rule of the Palestine region (mostly unrelated to Jews). As you correctly pointed out, there's virtually no text covering the period of Ottoman Palestine between 1517 and 1917 in the Israel article. This situation is ridiculous and makes the article look non-encyclopedic. Could you propose a text to add (maybe a paragraph or two)? Thanks--יניב הורון (Yaniv) (talk) 12:18, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

For the record, I found this and this. Could you make a summary of the Ottoman period to add in the Israel article?--יניב הורון (Yaniv) (talk) 19:17, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter messageEdit

 Hello, Onceinawhile. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

List of military occupationsEdit

I misunderstood what you were proposing. That article is a nightmare. It seems mostly people interested only in Israel and Palestine and then the occasional activist trying to get in something like Hawaii. It's a shame since its actually an interesting topic. I generally don't partake in pleasantries on Wikipedia and I very likely come off as a jerk, but.. heh. Anyway, we have happened upon each other many times in conversation and I find you to be quite neutral and you also try very well to resolve disputes. While I'm sure, though I can't recall, that we have disagreed in that article, it's not personal. Anyway, I just wanted to say, you do good work, and it is appreciated. -Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 11:21, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Ugaritic textsEdit

 On 10 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ugaritic texts, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that among the best-known Ugaritic texts are epic poems called the Baal Cycle (pictured), the Legend of Keret, and the Tale of Aqhat? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ugaritic texts. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ugaritic texts), 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.

Mifter (talk) 00:01, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, this was a brilliant read. The ages and ages that separate us from them and then again...No Swan So Fine (talk) 09:00, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Cartography of JerusalemEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Cartography of Jerusalem 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! Yoninah (talk) 15:32, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 20:34, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Ethnogenesis discussionEdit

Re to Here you are comparing apples and oranges – Jewish “existence as a group” [togetherness] vs Palestinian “modern identity” [specific terminology]. In doing so you missed both the apple and the orange you should have compared against – Jewish “modern identity” (only a few decades older than Palestinian) and Palestinian “existence as a group” (defined by the clear geographical boundaries and similar language, and like the vast majority of other geographically-defined groups, under different labels over time)

Yeah, you're right, I am, because one is an apple and the other is an orange-- imo. Jewish ethnic/religious (the exact meaning of this is subject ot harsh debate but this is beside the point, as no one disputes that there is a Jewish identity) identity pretty undisputably existed long before, millenia before in fact, Zionism was a thing. Zionism did recruit an existing social group as its adherents, but it did not create that group -- it already existed. Hence Zionism can be called a sort of bottom-up nationalism, which built on an existing identity that had lacked a state at the time of its emergence -- I would say, similar to the Korean, Polish, Kurdish, Hungarian, Czech, Albanian, Bulgarian etc etc cases -- i.e. the general pattern in Central/Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and SE Asia, as well as most ethnic nationalist movements nowadays. You could also have the converse of "top-down" nationalism where the state invents a new "people", as you can see in much of post-colonial Africa, the Americas, and some parts of the Arab world (Saudi, for example). Neither the bottom-up nor top-down descriptions really fit the Palestinian case though.

For Palestinian identity, opinions are divided on how it emerged -- one might hold that there was a medieval Palestinian identity that matured into the modern one but this is probably the minority view given that the relevant nationalisms in the late Ottoman times were not exactly Palestinian before Zionism became a thing, the majority holding that Palestinian nationalism emerged as a sort of self-defining identity, i.e. it emerged in response to a situation where a group of people had to unite to counter perceived threats. In the late Ottoman times, there was no Palestinian nationalism -- there was Syrian nationalism (bottom-up), there was Ottoman nationalism (top-down), and there was Arab nationalism (bottom-up). Instead if we follow the majority view, the Palestinian identity emerged a bit later -- either at the very dusk of the Ottoman period or later with the latest proposed date being the 1940s -- in response to the twin perceived threats of Western European domination and Jewish settlement, ascendance and domination [in fact, there is a paper I have that actually argues that there were two distinct Palestinian nationalisms at one point -- a Christian one and a Muslim one -- but that these united and reconciled with each other to make a common front against those threats]. That's where my rationale at least. The Palestinian case is not without analogs imo -- one could draw parallels to Macedonian nationalism, South Sudan's movement, and Ulster nationalism, and somewhat more debatably to Bosniak and Turkish nationalism. --Calthinus (talk) 20:37, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Israeli law in the West Bank settlementsEdit

 On 2 February 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Israeli law in the West Bank settlements, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Amnon Rubinstein coined the term "enclave law" to describe Israeli law in the West Bank settlements? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Israeli law in the West Bank settlements), 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.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Transcription into ChineseEdit

 Template:Transcription into Chinese has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Steel1943 (talk) 01:46, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

HiEdit

Didn't you inquire after books about Muslim shrines a way back? Well, I just got hold of "Pilgrimage, Sciences and Sufism: Islamic Art in the West Bank and Gaza" (see Abebooks or Amazon): looks useful, in a rather elementary sort of way. Unfortunately there are no refs, though, Huldra (talk) 23:51, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Huldra: thank you. Yes it was me – at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Palestine/Archive_9#Mosques_in_Jerusalem_-_sources?
Incidentally, my continuing interest in this topic was one of the reasons I wrote the Cartography of Jerusalem article on DYK today. Onceinawhile (talk) 18:14, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Actually I think I misread your message – I think you meant Talk:Maqam (shrine). Onceinawhile (talk) 18:17, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Not at all, I was indeed thinking of the Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Palestine/Archive_9#Mosques_in_Jerusalem_-_sources? discussion, cheers Huldra (talk) 20:14, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Cartography of JerusalemEdit

 On 8 February 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cartography of Jerusalem, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that almost all pre-modern maps of Jerusalem (example pictured) were made by Christians for a Christian European audience? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cartography of Jerusalem. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Cartography of Jerusalem), 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.

Amakuru (talk · contribs) 00:01, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Writer's Barnstar
Excellent work at Cartography of Jerusalem! Very interesting article. MX () 05:40, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Earth's circumferenceEdit

 On 11 February 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Earth's circumference, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Earth's circumference around the poles is almost exactly 40,000 kilometres or 21,600 (i.e. 360 × 60) nautical miles, because it was used to define those units of measurement? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Earth's circumference. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Earth's circumference), 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.

Vanamonde (Talk) 00:02, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

1RR vioEdit

23:40, 10 February 2019 and 07:32, 10 February 2019 would appear to be two reverts within a 24 hour period on a WP:ARBPIA article. Icewhiz (talk) 05:46, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument)Edit

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument) 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 FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 14:05, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument)Edit

The article British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument) you nominated as a good article has failed  ; see Talk:British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument) 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 FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 06:01, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Nautical mileEdit

Hi Onceinawhile. Just a warning that if you touch nautical mile you'll get the metric maniacs after you. Apparently anyone who disagrees with them is an unreliable source (NOAA in the States, The Admiralty (through its successor the UKHO) in the UK or the RYA), and multiple sources are no better than a "single quote from a book". You'll find that sources are dismissed and disallowed as primary sources, only the BIPM has any validity. Against such obstinate disbelief I gave up, life is too short to discuss with lumps of concrete. If you think you can do better, I wish you well, but I've removed all trace of nautical mile from my watchlist and am having nothing further to do with it. Best wishes (you'll need them) Martin of Sheffield (talk) 23:03, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Al Aqsa and ChanuyotEdit

I do not comprehend the reason for why you rejected my proposed change to Temple Mount hen what I said was right and clear-cut. I wonder if anyone has even bothered to check the sources which are not reliable.

You say I may be right but the only source used there is https://web.archive.org/web/20121021222606/http://www.campsci.com/museum/room18.htm. if you browse to the bottom you'll see the website is of Camp S'dei Chemed International (CampSCI) founded by a Rabbi. Camp SCI conducts tours for Jewish boys to Israel as seen from their current site campsdeichemed.com. I do not see how a touring program website is reliable.

You want me to take it to al-Aqsa article but that one doesn't mention Chanuyot at all and there is no requirement for me to have changes first made there that too with such an unreliable source. It's anyway

You also suggest me to study books on architecture of Al-Aqsa. But obviously I can't just pick up any book and spend hours reading them all over one thing. But I searched about relation of Chanuyots with the mosque on Google and Google Books.

I found nothing except Josephus, the Jewish War: Newly Translated with Extensive Commentary and Archaeological Background Illustrations" page 4 which is the only good source, actually the only source, I can find.

I don't understand why you created these hurdles to make such changes. I don't need permission to have content based on a very unreliable source changed, that too when the content differs from that source. I'll make another request. IRGCfan (talk) 17:55, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Josephus' War which I believe is reliable says ancient structures of hanuyot/Chanuyot still exist below al-Aqsa. So I think something like remains of the temple ships calked Chanuyot still exist below the mosque would be nice. If you want to add it, please do. IRGCfan (talk) 18:19, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Building of Al-Aqsa, other changes to Temple Mount by UmmayadsEdit

Hello again. I did some study on construction and architecture of al-Aqsa. Though I did not find anything about Chanuyots, I did discover that there are actually a lot of theories about the mosque. I mentioned this on the talk page of Temple Mount along with some other changes made by Ummayads.

Please take a look if you want to and make changes as you see fit. IRGCfan (talk) 20:52, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Ramesses III prisoner tilesEdit

 On 17 March 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ramesses III prisoner tiles, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that 3,000-year-old Ancient Egyptian pictures of foreign prisoners were found by fertilizer-diggers in 1903? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ramesses III prisoner tiles. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ramesses III prisoner tiles), 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:01, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Hebrew sourceEdit

I don't recall if you have cited this: [3]. As before, I can get things from DBFP. Zerotalk 02:53, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

@Zero0000: thank you Zero. I have been using it at Mandate_for_Palestine#Specialised_works; there is also an English version of the same from 1980. Onceinawhile (talk) 08:39, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Yes, indeed, I forgot that I have that already. Incidentally, does the Palestine Order-in-Council deserve an article? Zerotalk 11:01, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
@Zero0000: that’s a good idea. I have started a new article at Constitution of Mandatory Palestine. Onceinawhile (talk) 08:11, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Any chance you have a copy of the 1 Sept 1922 Palestine Gazette (which is where the Order in Council was published)? Onceinawhile (talk) 08:15, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Absolutely. I already started to make an image of the cover page. I'll send the whole issue tomorrow. Zerotalk 11:25, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Uploaded. Also: text at Unispal; remnants still in Israeli law. I understand that some amendments were made after 1922, perhaps in 1939. I'll look for them. Zerotalk 11:55, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

DippyEdit

Hello, and wanted to say nice work with the Dippy page. It worked out well, I think, with the merged material (even though the two pages were unmerged) greatly adding to the topic. Dinosaurs live! Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:18, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

@Randy Kryn: thank you - I appreciate it. I agree the merge-unmerge actually worked out well as we have a fulsome central article now.
On a side note, it amazes me that with all the dinosaur experts on wikipedia, we have only eight articles in Category:Dinosaur fossils. Always more work to do! Onceinawhile (talk) 15:58, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Maybe a template which includes the existing pages, as well as a few non-links to pages that could be written, would generate a few more articles. There are only so many stand-alone named dinosaur fossils, but "Related" things on a template could be included, such as the film Bringing Up Baby. Could be an educational template. Do you have any other notable fossils in mind which are unpaged? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:33, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
@Randy Kryn: yes I do – the first dinosaur fossil ever identified (a Megalosaurus fossil), the first fossil ever identified as belonging to an extinct species (a Mosasaurus fossil), the first mounted dinosaur skeleton in history (a Hadrosaurus fossil), the fossil that began the scientific study of dinosaurs (an Iguanodon fossil).
Onceinawhile (talk) 17:48, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Nice. And maybe a footer template could include things like artworks and television documentaries about individual fossils. The Dippy entry alone would have the two subsections. Then there is the history of fossil hunting. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:53, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
p.s. Fossil collecting, Fossil park, List of fossil sites, National Fossil Day, Paleontologist, just a few See also entries from 'Fossil collecting'. I don't see any present footer template which includes major fossils and fossil collecting. Randy Kryn (talk) 18:01, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Dippy (Diplodocus carnegii)Edit

  Hello! Your submission of Dippy (Diplodocus carnegii) 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! Yoninah (talk) 19:25, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK for DippyEdit

 On 31 March 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dippy, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Dippy is the most famous dinosaur skeleton in the world? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Dippy), 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 27Edit

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Palestinians, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Baird (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.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

NoteEdit

I left a note on their talk-page, and suggested they self revert. However, they did not break the current formulation of 1RR (as "original author" was removed) - I think. (I suggested they self revert anyway). The page was also missing an edit notice and banner. Icewhiz (talk) 05:13, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Some quoteEdit

I remember reading a quote somewhere on a Wikipedia article on the relationship between Transjordan and Mandatory Palestine. It went along something around:

The myth of Transjordan's excision from Mandatory Palestine was not only propagated by the Zionist movement but also by Palestinian nationalists. Ironically it mirrored the Zionist slogan that Palestine was "a land without a people for a people without a land"

I can't seem to find it nor can I remember where I read it. Any idea? Makeandtoss (talk) 15:42, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Makeandtoss: that would be an interesting statement – I don’t remember reading anything about Palestinians propagating that myth. I could see it perhaps making sense in the context of Jordanian-Palestinians looking to assert their status? Onceinawhile (talk) 16:21, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Nope, just Palestinian nationalists. I was almost certain I read it somewhere on Wikipedia but I looked at relevant articles and found nothing. Never mind. Makeandtoss (talk) 16:27, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
See here and here for examples and discussion. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 18:35, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Nothing about Jordan or Transjordan there.. It was a Jordan-related article. Makeandtoss (talk) 20:40, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Occupation of Ma'anEdit

 On 9 July 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Occupation of Ma'an, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Occupation of Ma'an has been called "one of the most confused chapters" of Jordan's history? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Occupation of Ma'an. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Occupation of Ma'an), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Titles might not move, but there is a lot of work to do.Edit

Hey Once. I am a bit tired from the discussion about the titles, and my morals forbid me from trying to fight people over their opinions. Perhaps we won't get the desired result of proper titles for the articles, but there is a lot of work to do there. I was thinking about rewriting the entire 1947–1949 Palestine war article. As a first step, I have created a draft for a better lead section in my sandbox, which came straight out of my mind and clearly lacks citations. The English sources I have in hand currently are most of Benny Morris' English books, Ephraim Karsh's 92 pages book from 2002 and a handful of Hebrew books which I do not intend to use (a. they are in Hebrew and translating them will be a headache; b. they are between 400 to 600 pages). I have access to JSTOR for good journal articles.

What I had in mind is to make the article less of a description of the war, and more about the war. Let the other two articles deal with the military history, and let this article deal with it more generally, and have detailed summaries of what we already have articles for, such as the background, the aftermath, Nakba, the famous and forgotten war crimes etc. Since recently I have been spending most of my time in Philistia and have a very limited time back in my home at the inherited land of Dan, I suppose I can't do most of the work, but perhaps I can help. This could be a more feasible move to better cover this topic in the English Wikipedia (Which will eventually boomerang to the rest of the Wikipedias, except for the Hebrew and Arabic ones, probably).--Bolter21 (talk to me) 13:55, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Also, although I personally see no problem with it, my sources are all written by Israelis. Non-Israeli sources would be great, as I believe beside maybe being more neutral or untouched by the conflict, they may have a language more suitable for quotation in an Encyclopedia.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 14:03, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks @Bolter21: some non-Israeli sources worth using are below:
  • Caplan, Neil (19 September 2011). "War: Atzma'ut and Nakba". The Israel-Palestine Conflict: Contested Histories. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-1-4443-5786-8.
  • Walid Khalidi, Selected Documents on the 1948 Palestine War, Journal of Palestine Studies, 27(3), 79, 1998.
  • Abdel Jawad, Saleh (2006). "The Arab and Palestinian Narratives of the 1948 War". In Robert I. Rotberg (ed.). Israeli and Palestinian Narratives of Conflict: History's Double Helix. Indiana University Press. ISBN 0-253-21857-8.
Onceinawhile (talk) 08:22, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

By the way. It seems we are not going to get a consensus for the naming discussion. I think I have an alternative solution, but I don't know if it is wise to use it right now, or for the postponed discussion in a few months. Maybe the idea of a common prefix was a mistake. Many editors brought up a serious problem I only now begin to accept. Indeed, there was no Israel before May 1948, and even though we find it alright, to other editors it is too problematic. Maybe a better tactic would be to have the whole war called "1948 Arab-Israeli War" or something like that, based on RS, find a good name for the conventional war, and keep the civil war phase with its current name? Maybe "1948 Arab League invasion of Palestine", and move most of the war information to "1947-1949 Palestine War" (Which I am currently working on). Also, I am going to change all the links from 1948 Arab–Israeli War to 1947–1949 Palestine war, even though I hate the title. --Bolter21 (talk to me) 10:49, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Upon working on 1947–1949 Palestine war, I really found it difficult to continue because of the psychological barrier of having "Palestine War" in front of my face and my inability to link to something by that name. I figured out, do we really need three articles? I think we should merge "1947–1949 Palestine war" with "1948 Arab–Israeli war" and keep the third article. What do you think?--Bolter21 (talk to me) 15:20, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Bolter21: I would like to see all three merged. While there might be consensus for that, I don’t see how you would get consensus for what the combined article name would be, as it is the exact same problem as the current RM debate. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:22, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Abdullah's entry into TransjordanEdit

 On 24 July 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Abdullah's entry into Transjordan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that at the time of Abdullah's entry into what was to become the modern country of Jordan during the interregnum period, the region was extremely poor, sparsely populated and widely considered ungovernable? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Abdullah's entry into Transjordan), 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.

valereee (talk) 00:01, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Interregnum (Transjordan)Edit

 On 24 July 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Interregnum (Transjordan), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that at the time of Abdullah's entry into what was to become the modern country of Jordan during the interregnum period, the region was extremely poor, sparsely populated and widely considered ungovernable? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Interregnum (Transjordan)), 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.

valereee (talk) 00:01, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Sharifian SolutionEdit

 On 5 August 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sharifian Solution, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Lawrence of Arabia's plan to install the Sharif of Mecca's sons as rulers in what became modern Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and western Saudi Arabia was only partially successful? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sharifian Solution. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sharifian Solution), 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.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

page protectionEdit

WP:RPP is the usual place to ask. Zerotalk 15:38, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Abolition of the CaliphateEdit

  Hello! Your submission of Abolition of the Caliphate 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! Yoninah (talk) 20:51, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Onceinawhile".