User talk:Tewfik/Archive 8

• (rocky start) Archive 1
• (until 17-06-2006) Archive 2
• (until 03-08-2006) Archive 3
• (until 04-09-2006) Archive 4
• (until 30-10-2006) Archive 5
• (until 21-02-2007) Archive 6
• (until 27-05-2007) Archive 7
• (until 20-07-2007) Archive 8
• (until 31-10-2007) Archive 9

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. For the Mediation Committee, ^demon[omg plz] This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 04:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC).

Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad mediation update

Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_mediation/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad --Sefringle^Talk 19:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Your comment on my talk

As long as you have not replaced the tag with the source I provided you with from Shahin, I have no reason to assume good faith. You are quite obviously aware of the discussion regarding her being a legitimate source on other pages. Your constant reversion on my addition of her as a source for the Canaanite name of Bet Shean was quite inexplicable, and invited speculation as to your intentions. I apologized for any offense you might have taken from my comments so as to be amicable, but that was not an admission of wrongdoing. I might add that actions speak louder than words. When you do the right thing and reinsert the material you deleted without regard for WP:NPOV, then maybe we can begin a productive editing relationship. Until then ... Tiamut 16:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

You know that Shahin's book is not a travel book, based on the review from The Independent. If you prefer to believe the misinformation spread by Daniel Pipes, an obviously partisan and reputedly bigoted anti-Muslim analyst, you are free to do so. But don't try and pretend it's me that is having trouble understanding. WP:AGF states "This guideline does not require that editors continue to assume good faith in the presence of evidence to the contrary." My knowledge of your editing track record and your persistent obfuscation and even lying (as is the case here: Shahin's book is not a travel book and you don't even have a copy so don't pretend you know what's in it) does not require me to be a quiet fool. Tiamut 12:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Is Jib (village) not on your watchlist? The discussion on Shahin not being a travel book occurred there and given your involvement in editing that article, I assumed you saw it. If you did not and I am mistaken, I will repeat for your benefit now that Shahin's book is not a travel guide. Since you don't have a copy of it and you have no sources that claim that it is a travel guide, on what basis are you challenging Shahin's expertise (or lack thereof)? Your claim remains simply a claim and your refusal to include the information is therefore not based on policy, but simply your stubborn refusal to give voice to an alternate POV, which violates WP:NPOV. Given that this is pattern with you, as I said, I have no reason to WP:AGF.Tiamut 15:49, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Tiamut, according to books.google.com Palestine: A Traveller's Guide is an insider's look at where, and how, Palestinians live today. It's listed under Travel/Foreign. The purpose for writing this work, as with most you have used, is expressly political. Shahin is not an academic, she's a journalist, and the book itself does not contain one single footnote. It is a personal, impressionistic, political view of Palestinians, not a scholarly work. The problem with your research is you are bound and determined to connect Palestinians to Canaanites, and so are desperately searching for works which make that claim. Unsurprisingly, they turn out to be political in nature, and generally unreliable. You should be starting from reliable sources, and reporting what they say, rather than desperately searching for confirmation for your thesis. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

In an attempt to move the debate beyond the simplistic "Traveler's Guide" characterization, here is an academic review of Palestine: A Guide, in the Journal of Palestine Studies. I think that focusing on this book is sort of unnecessary though as all of the information that has been cited to it isn't unique academic results but rather just straight foward, although obscure, historical fact. I would bet if one were to go to a university library and look on the shelves beside this book one will find others that have the same information. --Abnn 02:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

The book review confirms what I have said. And the issue is indeed this book, since Tiamut continues to claim it is some sort of reliable source for the extraordinary claims she is making. It's not. Let's move on to reliable sources, and report what they say instead. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:41, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

My RFA

Many thanks for your support at my RFA. It ended successfully and I am now a glorified janitor. If I can be of any assistance please don't hesitate to contact me through my talk page. Happy editing! —Ocatecir ^Talk 18:26, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Response to your question

I see that we are in general agreement; I would put place cities and towns & buildings both in the West Bank + Gaza Strip structure, because they are inherently tied to the physical location rather than what government may come and go (especially places like Jericho, which has been under so many different rulers over the last 7 or more thousand years.). I think listing them at CfD wouldn't be too contentious (probably not "speedy" however) but you can always be WP:BOLD and just create the cats and populate them. I plan on putting a number of new articles about ancient (well, classically ancient, 200s & 300s BCE) places in the area and will place them in those cats, too. Oddly, not many of these non-Biblical places have had much archaeologic work done on them since Ottoman times (when basically, the diggers were more interested in gold than history) probably figuring that Classical Greek and Roman archaeologists had plenty to do in Europe. Carlossuarez46 22:24, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

State Terrorism in Sri Lanka

Hi and thanks for your vote here. The article has gone through some major improvement. Its a general practice to keep an eye on the article when you vote at a AFD. Please take a look at the state of the article now. Thanks Watchdogb 01:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Infact the article had over 30 sources, over a period of time it became degraded to the point that someone felt confident to AFD it. No worries, wikipedai does not end tomorrow there is enough time in our life time to create and improve such articles. Please do take a look at it now. ThanksTaprobanus 18:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Haifa Oil Refinery Massacre

Both reports in The Times (31 December 1947 and 2 January 1948) refer to 41 Jewish dead. With regard to the 1920 article you will need at least one good source to support the claim that the riots were motivated by anti-Semitism. --Ian Pitchford 16:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-05-20 Al-Aqsa Intifada

Hello, long time not chat don't think you might even remember, although it was necessary. I see you are still your old hard-debating self, however this time I approach you with an agreement. I think your position on the Second Intifada issue is a good one, but is not helped by all the POV pushing by Humus, who is notorious for that even in non-controversial stuff.

I saw on the arguments someone mentioning "second intifada" is a sensible but derivative referent similar how some refer to George W Bush as simply the "43rd President." Even though we can refer to George W Bush as the 43rd President, his real name is still George W Bush.[...]Conclusions: we should use the real Palestinian name for their uprising,".

That is actually a good, sensible, thoughtful argument, but it doesn't hold: many military operations do not receive the name given by the initiating side, but rather that given by the media, academics, and other sources (ie Gulf war). Other operations are indeed given the operation name, but usually because the operation's name was the one that stuck with he media, academics, and other sources, (ie Operation Barbarossa) or because the event only has discrete significance for one of the sides (ie Operation Nachshon). Just a thought. I know it is weird comming from me, but I think that debate is overrated.--Cerejota 07:38, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I have been around, just needed some time out of the Israeli-Arab conflict pages as an editor (althought I watch em a lot)... BTW, I think Gulf War is the best example: Operation Desert Storm, the name given by the USA to the operation redirects to Gulf War.

However, I recommend that the NPOV stuff be toned down: it is *not* POV to use the name given by one side of the confict if that name is also used by many sources. I think we had this debate early on 2006 Lebanon war.--Cerejota 20:03, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey, your argument is good and logical, however, you do have to recognize that you represent a POV in many an editor's eyes, besides actually being a great dedicated editor. So perhaps people would be more open to arguments not related to neutrality coming from you? I do not mean this as disrespect, but rather because I hate to see when your otherwise great efforts get lost in the POV translation. Why argue neutrality when you can point to Gulf War? --Cerejota 14:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Why did you remove sourced content?

Hi,

Why did you remove a LOT of sourced content here[1]? All of it was sourced to VERY reliable and relevent sources. I suggest you self-revert.Bless sins 21:15, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

But I did add content one edit at a time. And I have done that numerous times. It's just frustrating when I add content one at a time, and osmeone comes and reverts me. The only way to respond to such a mass revert is to revert back.Bless sins 10:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I think I'm onto something big here

See Q: Is the term "Al-Aqsa Intifada" consistently misused on Wikipedia?. I think the solution to the problem might be near and it thankfully doesn't entail the victory of one side over the other. --Abnn 02:12, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Second Intifada (Al-Aqsa Intifada)

That's intriguing... Definitely the inverse isn't: "Al-Aqsa Intifada (Second Intifada)" sounds wrong to my ears. But "Second Intifada (Al-Aqsa Intifada)" allows for a descriptive title, that will not be open to serious challenges from any reasonable editor once it is. Do not allow yourself to be dragged into battle over content, the mediation is about the title. --Cerejota 14:35, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Hebrew translations

Hey Tewfik, I recently mad articles on the Israeli-Arab localities of Basma, Bir al-Maksur, Kamanneh, Zarzir and Meiser, i have their Arabic names but not their Hebrew ones. Seeing as you have added the Hebrew translations before I was wondering if you would again do it for these towns. -- Al Ameer son 4 June, 2007 15:45 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in, but I've just done them, so you don't have to worry about it :) Number 57 16:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Arab localities in Palestine 1948

Hi Tewfik, yes i saw you removed some from the category such as Baqa al-Gharbiyye, but I included towns like Fassuta, Nazareth, Arraba and several, several more existing localities in the list because although it is true of course they still exist (I go to the Galilee every year to visit family) but they no longer exist in Palestine. They existed there until 1948 but now they exist in Israel. If you look carefully I do not include Shagor, Carmel City, or Baqa-Jatt because those did not exist before or during '48 but instead as town mergers constructed by the Israeli government.

I can see however that this can still be misleading and the category could be confused containing just towns that were depopulated or abondoned but if this is the case I can make a seperate category for the depopulated towns and keep this category Arab localities in Palestine 1948 to include all Arab towns that are no longer a part of a Palestinian state. -- Al Ameer son

2006 Lebanon War Mediation

Hi, Shamir1 has opened a medation request for renaming the 2006 Lebanon War article to 2006 Israel-Hezbollah War. As someone who was involved in previous discussions on the topic, I thought you may want to join in. Cheers. — George ^[talk] 23:01, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Flag in Template:Infobox Israel municipality

Hello Tewfik. I wanted to tell you that I reverted the flag appearing on the template just for the short term while we discuss the issue for the reason I gave on the template's talk page. Best, nadav (talk) 09:25, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Clarification

IMHO all commons images should be categorized on commons and their categories should be linked from the relevant articles\cats on en, I don't see a reason why image pages should be created on en for commons pics just so people can categorize them on en because as you say, it defeats one of the purposes of having commons as a separate projects. I don't think there are clear-cut rules on this issue but it seems to me like you're right, there's no need to create categories for images on en, any that exist should be moved to commons. Yonatan ^talk 18:53, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Category:Geography of Jerusalem

I put a notice about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Palestine. --Timeshifter 00:45, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Category:Jerusalem

I put a notice about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Palestine. --Timeshifter 11:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Atlas of Palestine

I left a notice about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Palestine.--Timeshifter 15:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 14 June, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mamilla, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Smee 08:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Great work on Mamilla!!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 08:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Jaffa Road

On 14 June, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jaffa Road, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 16:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, and good job on Jaffa Road, that's what got me interested in it. If there are any mistakes in my translations please fix them. Also check out what I did at "Template:OldCity," I merged the gates and quarters template. Epson291 02:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Israeli cities in the West Bank

I don't really know if there's a precent, but I think it's a fine category for presenting factually accurate information without resorting to POV pushing from either side. Basically, the pro-Palestinian side aims to present these as some kind of colonies and places them in similar categories. On the settler side, the cities are presented as an integral part of Israel. While it has been a while and I don't remember the exact purpose of creating the category, I think it was as a response to a different kind of categorization by a staunch pro-Palestinian Wikipedian, which, as usual, delegitimized Israel and its claim to these localities. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 16:56, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

That would prevent edit warring and POV pushers wishing to delegitimize the status of these 3 cities as 'colonies' and not cities in the West Bank. I wouldn't personally oppose this though. By the way, there may be more Israeli cities in the West Bank in the future, especially considering the next government will almost surely be right-wing and pro-settlement. That's for a private discussion though, not relevant to Wikipedia. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 17:03, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Local council or not

Hi Tewfik, I was overlooking a map and I saw a town named Dabburiya near Nazareth, At first since I haven't seen it anywhere on wikipedia' North District or regional councils, I assumed it was just a small Arab village. However, as I was updating populations from ICBS population spreadsheet - CBS's end of 2005 and provisional end of 2006 Israeli city and town populations (PDF format) I found out that it had a population of 8,900 which would be far too much for an insignificant village. So I'm wondering if it is a local council or not. I was hoping you could find out since you know more about these type of things like in the Al-Batuf Regional Council. Or you can give me the net. document on Israel's local councils. Thanks a whole lot, Al Ameer son 17:26, 15 June 2007

Hey again, I have another town in the North District, on the border with the West bank that I overlooked on an ICBS spreadsheet. The town's name is Muqeible. It had a population of 3,000 in 2005 and although it is not as populous as Daburiyya I was wondering whether or not it is a local council. -- Al Ameer son 23:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, I uploaded a couple of images to Arab localities in Israel and Salfit.

I also wanted to ask you if you would help construct an info box template for Palestinian localities. (See, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Palestine#Infobox_Palestinian town -- Al Ameer son 18:16, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thats great, I'll distribute them to the locality articles as soon as you finish. Thank you very much.

-- Al Ameer son 00:50, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I'm not sure if you are modifying the city info boxes as well but if you are, I think they should be the same size as the town info boxes if not the same. -- Al Ameer son 00:52, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Message

I did receive it and I intend to do something about it soon, however, I've unfortunately had little to no time recently. Yonatan ^talk 20:54, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Initial Statement in 2006 Lebanon War mediation

Hey, hope all is going well. Wanted to point out to you that our mediator, Daniel, has requested inital statements by each of us on the mediation page. No rush, just wasn't sure if you were watching the medation page. Cheers. — George ^[talk] 23:43, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

IFD question

Greetings. I left you a question at Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2007_June_13#Image:Casualties-of-the-2006-Israel-Lebanon-conflict.png. All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 00:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Timeline of Military Operations in the 2006 Lebanon War

Hey again. I noticed you re-inserted the statement regarding the two missiles fired at Israel a coupl days ago that I removed. Don't you think that it's hard to link them to last summer's war (i.e., they shouldn't belong in the Timeline of Military Operations in the 2006 Lebanon War article)? Cheers. — George ^[talk] 04:51, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I guess where best to put it depends on who ends up being involved. Given your rewording though, mentioning that it is loosely related as a ceasefire violation (though apparently not by one of the parties to the ceasefire), and clarifying that Hezbollah denied responsibility, it's okay to leave it for now. We need to remember to move it when the responsibility gets worked out though, such as it ending up being linked to the current conflict in Lebanon. Cheers. — George ^[talk] 05:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Hehe, I wouldn't go so far as to say amazing, but at least better than the previous anon edit. ;) — George ^[talk] 05:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Map

I've fixed the West Bank template in order to also show major Israeli settlements in the West Bank, although it will likely get reverted, so I might need your help there. About the fence, I don't really know what parts are completed, and also they're building it all the time, so it would be difficult to make a map, but I could try sometime later. No time to do all this stuff :( -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 20:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Caesarea

The only mistake you did was placing the {tl|db-move}} template below the redirect line. That only adds the page to the CSD category, but the box saying why it is to be deleted does not show up. As such, it is impossible to say whether the tag was placed with intention of getting it deleted, or accidentally or as vandalism. Since I was unsure, I reverted it.

If you think disambiguating Caesarea, Israel is not necessary, I can delete it now. Do you want me to? --soum ^talk 17:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Caesaria redirects to Caesarea, Israel and Caesarea redirects to Caesarea (disambiguation). Which one should I move the Israel locality article to? (I am confused by the i and e; the article lists ...rea as the spelling but if I move it to Caesaria (the one you tagged), the title would be spelt differently). --soum ^talk 17:50, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Since there are lots of Caesareas, I guess Caesarea redirecting to the dab page rather than any particular Caesarea is probably better. What do you think? --soum ^talk 17:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

And regarding putting the tag on top, no the redir wont work. But wouldnt deleting the redir have the same effect? :) --soum ^talk 17:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Oops, didnt reealize you will respond here. Sorry for the late reply. And yeah, this is probably better. I am moving the article. --soum ^talk 18:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

2006 War in Lebanon

I'd rather discuss this a little than persist with continued re-reversions. I can't remember any genuine reason being given for the exclusion of these lines last year, the whole argument was all rather convoluted.Similarly without them the background still demonstrates an anti-Arab pov, as it fails to mention the role of Palestinian refugees and derides Lebanon's role with weasel words.Nwe 18:09, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Lam Tin

Thanks very much for the review and the edits! A few points that I'd like to respond:

• There's really not much to explain about "estate". The best I can probably do is to link this to real estate, in which the word "estate" shares the same meaning as that in the article.
• Flyover, interchange and podium linked.
• Some parts of Lam Tin#Lam Tin Estate and Lam Tin#Highway and road surface rewritten
• You did miss the Lin Tak Road one. See the second last paragraph of the Highway and road surface section.
• I'm trying to find somebody to see how could the monzogranite thing be re-integrated, but that isn't a big deal.

That's all, thanks! --Deryck C. 07:25, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

A few more items have been updated. Please reply at the article's talk page. --Deryck C. 09:16, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Userpage

If you would be willing to let me, I would be glad to re-design your userpage. I could take in mind any requests you might have. As a sort of point of reference, I have designed my userpage, which is pretty cool, and User:Daniel_123's userpage, which is even cooler to me. I have also done many others, and would be glad to do yours. †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 19:38, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay, one thing to start. Your page seems a little cluttered, (as I'm sure you already know). I was thinking I could move it around to have some important thing such as your barnstars and Babels at the top, in their respective corners. I would give your page a nice background; I was thinking a variety of either soft browns or blues, and put some of your smaller things in boxes that you can click out to display. Then, I'd take it from there, watching to make sure I didn't disrupt anything you already had. Does that sound good? †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 19:54, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, at the moment it remains very unfisnished, though I will finish your page by tonight. †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 21:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Right now, there's a slight error in the display of your page, But I'll fix it tomorrow. (I'm spent from 3 hours of working on it.) †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 23:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes!!! It is finished and bug-free! Yes! Hoo-haa!! Yeah, I know, it's pretty exciting. Please give me your comments on my talk page. (I've only tested your page in Internet Explorer, it has yet to be tested in Mozilla. I'll let you know how it works out. †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 14:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Regretably, I think my expertise (or as close to it as i'll get as a twelve-year-old) is about to fail me with your userpage. I may very well be able to work on the problems with your user- and babel-boxes; though I can only hope to try and fix the display of the hide/display boxes. Perhaps you could convince user:Daveydweeb to help you out there? None-the-less, my evening with be devoted to fixing your userpage as you like it. †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 19:17, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I was indeed able to change the alignment of your userboxes, though I do not know if this is how you wanted it. Either way, I'm reasonably assured I've done my best to fix them. I still can't get your boxes to be open by default. You should check with the user I referred to above. †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 23:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, as I wait for a reply from Daveydweeb, I think that's all I can do for you with the show/hide display. If you have any other concerns in the meantime, I would be glad to address them. †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 13:30, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Cfd

Response to your question: I'd wait a little while, then propose again. I don't think the present situation is so horrible that the DRV process will intervene: they only tend to delete WP:BLP problems that are kept and undelete wrongly deleted things. Sometimes emotions run hotter or colder; I think that recent events in the region probably have the heat higher than on average particularly among some who fear that a united Palestine is slipping away. Carlossuarez46 20:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I may do that; over time one can see that the only people you can get away with bashing on Wikipedia are Jews, Kurds, and gays - everything else has to be on such solid ground or you get the accusations you've got (I got a bunch when I nominated a bunch of LA thug gangs). I don't even know whether you are Israeli, Palestinian, or Latino like me (less likely if Tewfik is your name); and you know what, we shouldn't have to care. Unfortunately, such is Wikipedia's WP:BIAS. Carlossuarez46 20:47, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I wish I could speak Hebrew & Arabic, but alas; I spend too much time learning languages I cannot practice. I did learn a little Hebrew from a friend: HaKelev oseh havhav. All I the rest I know in either Hebrew or Arabic is from the media, Shalom, Salaam, etc. Carlossuarez46 21:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

3RR on Gilo

I should have just left a message, but you only reverted part of the edit, so I completed it. Tewfik^Talk 08:46, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

ok. I should have looked at the diff. I also gave him a 3RR warning, so I hope we're done with this for now. nadav (talk) 08:49, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Should I fill out a 3RR report? I don't know whether it's worth it since it's an IP... nadav (talk) 08:52, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I got him here, though you may want to comment to speed up any blocks. While it isn't always effective to block dynamic IPs, this one seems static and has other types of warnings, so a block would be effective in stopping the disruption (unless he starts socking, but that can be dealt with as well). Cheers, Tewfik^Talk 08:56, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Lam Tin again

Anything going on with the article? Haven't heard from you for a few days already. --Deryck C. 15:01, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind help with the large scale cleanup and promotion! --Deryck C. 14:22, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Article Improvement

Hi. I just wanted to stop by and say good job on the improvements that you made at Gila Golan. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 23:44, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

By any chance do you think you might have material to sporce and improve Gal Gadot? --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 02:33, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Mostly I just noticed that there were no sources on the article and I was unable to find anything. Since the topic was similar to the article that you improved, I thought that you might have access to some additional information that could be used to source the article, but if not, no worries. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 10:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Why revert Exodus

Everything I mentioned is either self referential in the story but not mentioned in the article, or inferable, ie; the mountain Horab is located between Midian and Rephidim because its separately referenced to Midian and to Rephidim. Likewise between between Midian and Rephidim is Elat. Midian lies across the Red Sea from Thebes and Thebes port of Elim which are adjacent stations of the Exodus. You can't leave Egypt and three months later enter Sinai by land since Egypt borders the Sinai by land.Rktect 14:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

As frustrating as it sometimes can be, the policy on no original research specifically prohibits such inferable information. The point is highlighted especially in controversial subject matter like biblical studies, where there are many opinions involved. OR is one of the most important policies, and unfortunately it is also among the hardest to understand. I suggest you review it carefully, and if you have any questions, feel free to approach myself or the helpdesk. Tewfik^Talk 17:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Usually a Bible verse is considered a reference (chapter and verse). If you refer to it it falls in a category self referencing. There is nothing contraversial that I know of in taking several to discuss the stations of the Exodus, ie; they were here, then they were there. Opinion doesn't come into it if you are simply adding the verse as a reference. Rktect 18:55, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Language

No worries. Please feel free to revert my changes. As stated before, I don't really have a strong opinion on this matter, and I'm okay with the way it was written previously using the term "abducted" throughout; I'm just trying to help find a consensus that people can live with. You may have to go down the dispute resolution path (RfC, RfM, etc.) with Abufijli to reach some sort of agreement, as he seems to strongly disagree with the wording. Cheers. — George ^[talk] 17:59, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. — George ^[talk] 21:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Erm, actually you beat me to it. ;) — George ^[talk] 21:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I just got on and saw your message, went to do the revert, and had an edit conflict. Craziness. :) — George ^[talk] 21:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Mamilla

The problem with how it was before was that some pictures were larger than the sections, meaning there was loads of whitespace between sections, particulary in the Ottoman control bit. I didn't know how else to fix it other than bunching the pictures up. Number 57 08:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Category:Israeli settlements

I've copied a message and my response from my Talk to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel to get greater input Tewfik^Talk 17:26, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I've readded all the settlements in the subcats back to the top one too - I think it's important to have them all listed in one place too.

Also, I have been removing them from the ... in Israel categories as they are not in Israel. Number 57 10:37, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Categorisation is just that, a method of organisation, and it shouldn't be confused with content. All of the Israeli settlements are labelled as such in their leads, and are already in subcategories of Category:Israeli settlements. Furthermore, removing them all from Israeli local government hierarchy is quite unhelpful, as regardless of their international status, they are officially and practically part of Israeli local government, and not some fictional West Bank or Golan Heights local government. Again, this is a matter of organisation, and not content, and so I've reverted the changes until further discussion (the changes have in the past also been contested by Eliyak and DLand). Tewfik^Talk 17:26, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I've replied on the WikiProject Israel page - we'll continue the discussion there. Number 57 17:56, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

GA Review of Jaffa riots

Dear Tewfik/Archive 8, I am sorry to inform you that I have failed Jaffa riots for GA status because of several issues, which are detailed on the article's talk page. If there are any comments you would like to make, or any questions you have about the failing of this article, then please forward them to my talk page. Good luck for a future candidacy. Regards, Anonymous Dissident^Talk 13:53, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Rktect

Hi Fayssal,

There is a fuller discussion here, though it got somewhat buried under God. Tewfik^Talk 18:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Tewfik. Thanks for your message. Yes, i indeed participated at that thread ;) Still, my comments at the new thread still makes a lot of sense. Reverting edits as OR is just a poor way (especially when the edits are backed by references) when the talk page is open to everybody. I won't discuss the weight of sources but i mainly point out to the reverting w/o discussion behaviour. The thing i appreciate in you is that you are one of the editors who are keen to explain their actions to others. This is the thing Beit_Or should have done. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 14:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Fayssal, Rktect's references were spurious and the content of his edits was crankish. If a topical ban after the arbitration case against him taught him nothing, further explanations will avail him not. Beit Or 17:34, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

That comment by Beit Or is not NPOV. Its uncivil, undocumented (what reference is spurious), and uncalled for. At a minimum there should be discussion of reverts on the talk pages, and or the user pages, and in the case of multiple reverts using the contributions page to systematically take down everything an editor puts up some question of motive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rktect (talk • contribs) 13:57, 6 July 2007

Removal of data from Syrian_Malabar_Nasrani

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Syrian_Malabar_Nasrani&diff=prev&oldid=142549683

"Besides a lot of the Malabari locals who joined early Christianity returned to their earlier faith during a shaivite revival by the shaivite scholar Manikka Vachkar. "

The following data is Without any historical proof and also deframtory . Hence will be removed .

Tinucherian 02:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Reply to ur query : The neutrality of the contributor of the part of that passage is suspect . Besides It is not said so on the said reference. I am also a researchor on christian history of kerala, india.

Regards 06:55, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The account of the reconversion of several locals to hinduism by Manikka vachakar is described in many books dealing with Nasrani history including the books:

1) Moraes, G. M. A History of Christianity in India. Vol. 1. Bombay: Manaktalas,1964

2) Ittup, History of the Malabar Syrian Christian Church

The works of Manikka vachakar is described in 'A History of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 5' by Surendranath Dasgupta

The author Tinucherian has done vandalism by deleting passages with references. He has also done vandalism by creating a separate article on the Syrian malabar Nasranis called Suriyani Christians of Kerala to write his own pov. When articles like 'Syrian Malabar Nasrani' and 'Saint Thomas Christians' dealing with syrian christians or suriyani christians already exist. The newly created article has now been redirected to the article 'Saint Thomas Christians'. Vagab 20:50, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

2006 Lebanon War

I have responded to your message on 2006 Lebanon War, sorry about the delay.Nwe 21:35, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Understandably condsidering the number of edits you carry out, you seem to have confused two different discussions on Talk:2006 Lebanon. Our own, rather static, discussion related to the background of the article.Nwe 21:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Hamas

sorry, not sure where else to put this. "militarily took control" is a better interpretation of the situation, although I'm not sure the quote by Abbas belongs in the lead, maybe in the body of the article recounting current developments? I understand the weight of someone in Abbas' position stating something as baldly as he has. However, I'm not sure that quoting people who are currently in conflict with the subject of the article is an ideal way to maintain neutrality in the lead.Delad 07:09, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks and will do. I have no problem with criticisms (or statements critical) of Hamas, I hope you haven't misinterpreted me. I just felt that quoting Abbas, given the current situation, is not germane in the lead. I don't mean to argue this out here and I will give some time to considering the 'other side of the coin' before further edits. Thank you for your comments Delad 07:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Ir Ovot

It is listed as a moshav in the Hebrew wiki, but I don't know if that is more accurate! Number 57 08:26, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

NavFrames problem

Hi! I'm so sorry for the long reply time, but I've been relatively inactive for the last few months and totally offline for the last few days. As for your problem, I checked out Wikipedia:NavFrame#Templates and found that NavFrames, like the ones used on my own userpage and yours, do not support a custom initial state. Instead, it's possible to use a collapsible table, as detailed on that same page.

If you like, I can convert your page for you when I have the chance (or, you know, die trying). That won't be for 24 hours or so, since I'm quite busy in the real world, but I'll do my best to get it done if that's what you'd like.

Hope this suits you. :) -- Daveydweeb (^chat/_review!) 11:07, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Eek! I didn't get a proper chance to get on to this. I'll get on to it as soon as my current family problems have been dealt with, hopefully in the next day or so. :( Sorry about that. -Daveydweeb (^chat/_review!) 09:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear Tewfik

My dear Tewfik, I'm so sorry it took me these hours to get back to you, after the charming, well-thought message you left at my talk page. I've reviewed the article's history, and it appears that you're right in your judgement. Please be aware that I didn't protect the article; I reviewed a request for its unprotection at WP:RFPP, and at first glance it seemed to me that unprotecting wasn't prudent at that particular time. Right now, I also see that some discussion to reword some parts of the text is taking place at the Talk page, and there's a heated debate there; so I must confess to you, I'm in two minds. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a controversial topic by nature, so I'm not suprised! ;) My best advice to you, following your concern, is to approach the protecting admin with the same rationale you commented at my Talk page and discuss with him the convenience of unprotecting. As a side note, and as an uninvolved editor, I offer myself to caution and, if necessary, to deal with any form of improper editing behavior like the one you described to me. I hope this helps! :) If I can be of further assistance, you know just where to find me ;) Love, Phaedriel - 22:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the beautiful reply, dear Tewfik! Well, actually, your userpage looks very nice to me; but, if you insist... I'll try my best :) Be aware that I'm a little swamped with requests atm, so it may take me several days... I'll try to honor the results ;) Unrelated side note: I just unprotected the usual suspect, as you may have seen. Don't hesitate to whistle my way if things get out of hand again, k? Love! :) Phaedriel - 09:08, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

MDT David

I removed the MDT David from the David disambiguation page again. Redlinks are certainly useful in articles to alert readers to topics that they might create articles for. On the other hand, disambiguation pages aren't articles; they are navigation aids to help readers get to the articles they meant to find under the title. Each disambiguation entry should have exactly one blue link, either the entry itself or part of the description that links to an article that mentions the entry. Searching for "MDT David" didn't turn up any mentions in articles, but if it can be added to another appropriate article, then the redlink could be added to the dab with that article linked in the description. See WP:D and WP:MOSDAB for the disambiguation page guidelines. Cheers! -- JHunterJ 11:15, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Ir Ovot

On 11 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ir Ovot, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 11:28, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Userpage

Just a thought on what you sent me, I have had a hard time getting on as of late (summer camp) but I have really considered it. While I have created for you a very visually appealing page, with the boxes, perhaps I could service you better by getting rid of them. There would truly be little point in being able to close a box that was already open, unless you like playing with the mouse button. That said, it really does seem a little bit of a hassle to click them open. So, I would like your opinion on this, and I would gladly do as you wish here. Hope I can help, †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 16:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Hi thank you for your useful contributions on the talk page of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Please, if it is not asking for too much, could you state whether you oppose or support my proposal in the way I have done here I think that will make it easier for any user to see whether it got support or it didn't. Thank you very much.--Jorditxei 10:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Map

That wouldn't be a problem, but you already have more or less what you need on my complete map, see it here: [2]

I will create a more appropriate version for what you want shortly.

-- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 19:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I've made 2 images: [3] [4] - one has local councils and the other doesn't. Maybe it can work with 250px. If not, I can remove municipality borders entirely (but that would make some people think that sub-nafot are actually municipalities). -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 20:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I did not see a problem with leaving local councils on the Tel Aviv District (not Gush Dan!) inset. If you want them removed, it's not a problem. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 20:40, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I think that the cities should be in small regular print, similar to how they are in the Tel Aviv District inset. I'll try to work on it today (not sure I'll be able to). -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 21:21, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Much better. On a final note, I'd like to add that IMO not only 100,000+ cities should be labelled and there's room to label many more important cities, such as Eilat, Nazareth, Tiberias, Safed, Acre, Sderot and Hadera. Other cities which can be labelled without crowding the map too much are Beit Shemesh, Arad, Dimona, Nahariya, Afula, Karmiel and Kiryat Shmona. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 21:38, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Also Or Yehuda, Ramat HaSharon and Herzliya. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 21:40, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

You've raised interesting points/questions, and here are my comments:

1. There are numerous solutions to where the 'cutoff' can be. While it's logically flawed, the way most world atlases (and small-scale maps) work is by labeling as many localities as possible without cluttering the image too much. I don't think it's a problem in this case. There are ways to highlight important/larger towns by using bold typeface. Another thing to consider is that some cities are much more important than others, regardless of population, and there can be one or more reasons for that. For example, Tiberias is a regional center for the entire northeastern Israel, plus it's historically a very important city. Nazareth is culturally very important for its religious value, as are a number of other cities like Safed. Sderot is important because it's all you hear on Israel-related news today. Ramla, while not generally notable, is a district capital. The list just goes on. On the other hand, there are many cities with medium-large populations but zero importance, like Modi'in, Giv'atayim, Bat Yam, the Krayot, Nahariya, Umm al-Fahm, etc.
2. I am a soldier with free public transportation and a camera, therefore I have no problem taking pictures. All I need is a good point from which to shoot, and I don't know Bnei Brak too well, or Holon or Rehovot for that matter. If you know a good point from which a picture can be taken, I'll be happy to go there and take it. I'm thinking of going up the BSR towers or that pink building in Ramat Gan for a view of Bnei Brak, but there might not be a place to shoot from there.
3. I'd also like to bring more city articles up to GA status. This actually is one of the easiest tasks by comparison (for example, it's much harder to find information on Israel Railways and such). This however requires research like we did in school - sit at the library and read boring books from which you only need 2-3 lines. I'm really not up to it with the limited time I have (libraries aren't open on weekends). However, I think that what's necessary for these articles is a plan, like what sections should be there and how large each section should be. If such a plan is made, I'm sure that at least 50% of the information is freely available on the internet.

-- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 00:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Israel Population Lists

OK Sorry --Flymeoutofhere 08:52, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

OK - will do--Flymeoutofhere 09:34, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Images and stuff

Okay, I'm back now. So where are discussions about this being held? Yonatan ^talk 18:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I read through it (skimmed through some parts as they are largely repetitive). I think maybe a good place to bring this up would be in WP:VPP? Yonatan ^talk 14:00, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you missed this earlier? If not, no pressure, as you're the one the matter was urgent to. :) Yonatan ^talk 03:01, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I have the names and I suppose a lot of them will see the commons administrator's noticeboard, but I doubt that's really the place to create en policy. It's clear to me that commons was created so the image stuff can't be dealt with on there and the encyclopedia stuff can be dealt with on here - it therefore doesn't make sense to specifically port over images from there just for use in categories here when they should be categorized over there. I don't know why I'm explaining this to you, as you already know this - maybe it's something to do with the fact that it's 6AM. :P Anyway, User:MECU, User:Rama, User:Editor at Large, user:Gmaxwell and User:Pfctdayelise are all users who are quite proficient with both commons and en and will probably all agree that your opinion is the right one, I unfortunately can't think of anyone who's active on both projects\is familiar enough with commons who would think otherwise so as to bring the view of "The Other Side"™. Hmm... maybe an RFC? Yonatan ^talk 03:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah we could and they definitely would suggest one if there was one, I was just saying that as the Timeshifter guy may say that this was the result of canvassing, etc. You make a good point about an RFC. Yonatan ^talk 17:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Nope, not really. :) Now we just need to put an end to this matter and make it clear that policy is that images should be on commons, where they belong and in categories on commons, where they belong. Yonatan ^talk 17:58, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 14 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article AIL Storm, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 11:50, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

List of cities by population in Israel

Hi, just dropping you a note because I don't really see what you want us to do here. I leave the tag in case someone figures it out ;). If you want us to selectively move the history of the table sorted by population in List of cities in Israel, it is unfortunately not possible. -- lucasbfr ^talk 00:32, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

touching base

How are things with Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-05-20 Al-Aqsa Intifada? Is the case still active? Do you have any questions or concerns? Vassyana 05:59, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Monte Ne

You left comments on this article's talk page for certain issues to be addressed for GA. The nomination should have been put on hold for no more than seven days for this. It has been about three weeks. This nomination needs to be processed. LaraLove 15:51, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Hopefully the custodians will continue to work on it and renominate at a later time. Regards, LaraLove 18:02, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey, Tewfik!

Not so archaic – check it out. ;)--G-Dett 00:52, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Yasser Arafat Upgrade to FA status

Hello and Salaam Tewfik, I know you are a very respective, hard-working and experienced editor and for this reason I ask of you to review the article on Yasser Arafat. Filll and I as well as other users have put a great deal of work for the article including expansion, copy-editing, cleaning up, referencing, etc. I do not think it is quite ready for FA status just yet, mostly because of some reference-external links presentation problem but I would like you to review it and name any other existing problems so you or I or other users can fix it, so that eventually it would become a Featured Article. Thank you very much

P.S. I don't want to seem impatient or anything of that sort but I was wondering how the info boxes for the Palestinian localities was going and if I can help to speed up the process because I know you have many other things to do as well. My Blessings -- Al Ameer son 01:47, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

hi

سلام|hello.on frist sorry if my english is not so good. I come to discussions page and talk about why I moving article israel-lebanon war but i came here for ask you a question.! are you talk about me and my contributions in english wikipedia with another user in persian wikipedia?--Hoseyn_1 ^#Talk 07:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

are you see my answer in my talk page?--Hoseyn_1 ^#Talk 10:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

hi, i answered you.--Hoseyn_1 ^#Talk 15:25, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Userpage

I assure you that by noon today I will have it done, with the material aligned correctly, and without the boxes. †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 12:55, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

While I gave myself 3 hours, that actually took about ten minutes. If you have any other concerns please voice these to me on my talk page, (I'm a little bit of a perfectionist when it comes to UP design). I would be glad to make any changes you would like, and perhaps even more so if you said you liked it. Cheers. †Ðanieltiger45† ^{Talk to me}as 13:07, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

My recent changes to Israel

I hope you don't mind the changes I made to the Foreign relations and military section. I have the poor habit of leaving the edit window open for several hours once I retire to sleep and saving the rest of my changes for the next day. So, when I saw you had made major changes to the section, I tried my best to merge my changes with yours. I believe I explained my changes sufficiently in the edit summaries, but inform me if something was unclear or you drastically disagree with a change. I don't believe I actually edited or changed something you just added, but rather edited and changed pieces that has long been in the article and never cleaned up (in the same manner you cleared out the Nuclear section). -- tariqabjotu 16:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Three-revert rule

Tewfik. If I have done three reverts, it was unwittingly (see my talk). I undertook to revert but note this would mean undoing Herzl's work, which would be a shame. I'll try to look at this tomorrow.RegardsNishidani 17:58, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Tewfik 2. Caught your note and posted this on my talk page in reply:-

Oh, well, then, I haven't checked, but I take your word for it that I am in violation. Moral. Never play by a 'game' without mastery of the rules. I was trained as a youth to take the scrupulous ascertainment of facts, textual or historical, as a moral obligation, in a community of scholars. Perhaps I fall short of the ideal inculcated into me, though I've never had that charge laid against my academic work. It only appears to function in wikipedia.

Pity, I would have liked to do this on a daily basis, collaboratively, but this is pointless. Without alluding to yourself or jayjg, obviously the rule which convicts me, can be rigged, like any system of rules. You only need 1 revert each by 3 people who agree in disagreeing with a single poster, to make him trip the wire, and have his record marked as a rule violator. Now that you have clarified this rule for me, I can see it militates against day by day work on wikipedia. I'll take it more casually. Indeed I'll drop it, and Sozomenos and the terebinth ritual, and so much else, to my gain - I much prefer reading up history in real books, that being sucked into the subtle politics of editing. Politics it is. What is remarkable about this and so many other sites, is the inability to be informed adequately. It's Orwell's memory hole, under daily revision. Thank goodness the Encyclopedia Britannica, and scholarly journals still exist.

I won't 'self-revert', because I'm too tired to check out how to do that (it's a new word to an old man like myself), so denounce me to the appropriate authorities. I won't resent it. It is the rule, and rules are there to be obeyed. The law does not admit of ignorance.Regards Nishidani 18:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)