User talk:Gilabrand/Archive 13

Why did you undo my edit? I tried to constructively remove a direct quote from a foreign website when I couldn't figure out how to rewrite it. I hope I didn't do something wrong. I explained the reasoning on the talk page. 96.238.211.171 (talk) 07:48, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No you didn't do anything wrong. You alerted readers to the need for further information and sourcing, which is a good thing. However, deleting a sentence that is backed up by a reference is not necessarily the way to go about it. Quotes from the Bible or Talmud are not plagiarism. It is also worth noting that translations in general (and maybe even especially) of Scriptures and ancient texts are only approximations. Sdom apple, for example, may be used today as a popular name for the plant, but not by translators in the ancient world.--Geewhiz (talk) 08:04, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was these sentences I was worried about. "Sodom apple tree is mentioned in the Mishnah and the Talmud. The long fibers attached to the seeds may once have served as wicks". Those are a copy from elsewhere, and might need changing. Perhaps "Sodom apple is listed in the Mishnah. The fibers attached to the seeds may have been used as wicks. However the Mishnah forbids this for the Sabbath." 169.232.131.133 (talk) 21:09, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ,

I'm having trouble adding Jewish and Israeli villages depopulated during Israel war of independance in Sirya and Jordan. I found a list from 1933 of villages but I fail to add (each time they are being deleated) .

perhaps my language is full with POV but I would be glad if you could add the links (or help).

http://www.gplanet.co.il/prodetailsamewin.asp?pro_id=1554 http://www.golan.org.il/616/325.htm109.226.49.34 (talk) 11:35, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is clearly inappropriate canvassing. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 11:38, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean ? (sorry I don't understand what you mean )109.226.49.34 (talk) 11:45, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. I took the sources from the Hebrew wikipedia 109.226.49.34 (talk) 11:46, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you will not be scared away by editors like SupremeDeliciousness, who have apparently forgotten what it's like to be new around here. If you have something to contribute, please go ahead. It is not "canvassing" to ask for help. The data you add needs to be reliably sourced. Preferably, the sources should be in English, but Hebrew or Arabic are also acceptable. Try to write the text in a Word file before you place it in the article. That way you can do a spelling and grammar check.--Geewhiz (talk) 13:50, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gilabrand, you're in violation of 1RR at Esh Kodesh. Once here: [1] and once here: [2]. Would you please self revert one of them? Also, is there some reason you're not communicating on the talk page? How is it collaborative to keep editing without discussing my concerns if only to dismiss them?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 13:19, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see you've already been reverted. But please be careful, OK?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 13:20, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have not reverted anything. I have edited the page to provide new material and new references, addressing the concerns of everyone who has edited, while bringing in all points of view. I have bent over backwards to improve this article - as opposed to a whole crew of "editors" who spend their days warring over some term or other and never doing a stitch of constructive work. I hope you have left similar comments on their pages.--Geewhiz (talk) 13:30, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, see, you violated the bright line 1RR. I wasn't commenting on the quality of your work, but the fact that you made two reversions, which I linked to, in 24 hours. I don't know if you've looked at the talk page of the article, but there amongst all the comments you've ignored so far is at least one that's quite complimentary about your work. I was just warning you that you broke 1RR and the diffs are there to prove it. If you're so interested in improving the quality of the article why won't you talk at all on the talk page?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 13:48, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So let me understand. You're saying that spending a whole day adding new material & references to an article that was hardly more than a paragraph, and clarifying a statement of where Esh Kodesh is, based on a reliable source, is reversion? I don't know what "bright line" means either. About your comments on the talk page, maybe it's my dyslexia kicking in, but I don't see anything in the least complimentary. But that's OK. I'm not fishing for compliments.--Geewhiz (talk) 14:15, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should take some time to read up on what a revert is if you don't see how you violated the 1RR. Your first edit to the article changed other editors' work. That counts as a reversion. Then you reverted Sean Hoyland after other editors had edited the article. I'm not making it up, and I'm not planning to report you since there's nothing left for you to self-revert, and I'm not saying you didn't add a lot of material to the article. I'm just saying that you violated 1RR. It might be worth taking some time to understand why. Or not. Anyway, it's your business.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 16:24, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for noticing that non-Middle Easterns were put there. Please also take a look at

Hi, Gilabrand! Hope RH was wonderful and that you have a good and sweet New Year! I wanted to let you know that I created an article on David Resnick (now spelled Reznik), the Israeli architect -- who has his office in Jerusalem. (http://reznik-architects.com) If you ever have the chance to take a photo of him and upload it, that would be great! :) He's a winner of the Israel Prize for architecture, along with other awards such as the Rechter Prize -- but I'm having a hard time finding a photo of him. Anyway, you're my official Jerusalem contact, so I thought I'd ask! Best wishes for a gmar hatima tova! NearTheZoo (talk) 14:34, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.

Some time ago, you changed the Infobox pic for Haim Hefer to one showing the subject and Rachel Haramati, with a caption stating she was his wife. It turns out they are unrelated. Per Hidro, "[Rachel] is a not a family relative, she is a TV producer". The fact that she shares the same surname as Hefer's wife is apparently coincidental.

The caption was fixed by someone a few days ago – I was just following up. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 10:29, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't remember anymore, but I presume I took it from the Hebrew page and just copied the caption. It would certainly be nice to have a better photo of him...Perhaps you can post a photo request on the talk page.--Geewhiz (talk) 10:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Gilabrand, Here is a request for someone to review the David Resnick page since Yoninah linked it to the DYK nomination for Yad Kennedy. Would you consider that? Also, wanted to make sure you saw I did another article on an Israeli I think is very significant (highly significant to American service personnel and veterans): Gilla Gerzon. Best wishes! NearTheZoo (talk) 12:50, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gilabrand,

I have looked at the template but do not see anything wrong with it from a technical point of view. Can you be more specific about what you are referring to?

Cheers, Ynhockey ^(Talk) 08:05, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I now see someone fixed it a few days ago. It had been showing up as a random bunch of place names without the template frame.--Geewhiz (talk) 08:27, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit with the edit summary "ce; OR", did you look at what the source cited says ? It supports the statements, in fact too much, because they look like copy/pastes. Search for the word "Israeli" and you'll find the statements. This is the kind of edit that wouldn't look good on an AE report. It looks like you either didn't check the source and guessed that it was OR or you did check the source and removed the bits you didn't like. You should try harder to not make edits like this. Sean.hoyland - talk 15:50, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your helpful comments. Looking forward to your help in editing the mangled English, updating the information and removing non-encyclopedic material.--Geewhiz (talk) 16:52, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

please reply: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AGilgal_I&diff=516812405&oldid=471103648 --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 14:14, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This source has absolutely nothing to do with what you cited to it. Please do not misrepresent sources in the future. Thank you. nableezy - 17:50, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that was a mistake. I meant to link a different article.--Geewhiz (talk) 06:51, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, but you just violated the 1RR on Taybeh. Please self-revert. I dont know if that is a reliable source or not, but when it is challenged you should be going to RS/N, not just reverting. nableezy - 16:03, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any tag on Taybeh that prevents me from editing it. I added a source that is perfectly valid: an article by an Arab member of a non-partisan international think tank.--Geewhiz (talk) 16:19, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Really, you dont think the topic-wide 1RR applies? All right, we can see if that holds up. nableezy - 16:33, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's your interpretation. This is not about an Arab-Israeli conflict. It's about a Muslim-Christian conflict. --Geewhiz (talk) 16:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC) Just wondering: Any reason you are not removing it yourself, if it bothers you so much? It never ceases to amaze me how I spend hours fixing up articles like these and never get a thank you - just angry comments and criticisms at every opportunity. .--Geewhiz (talk) 16:41, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Im trying not to be so quick with the trigger, so instead of removing it I brought it to RS/N. As far as a thank you, Im fairly certain that I have thanked you in the past (scroll to the top of this page). The problem is that you often make more than fixes to articles, changes that I dont generally think merits a thank you. But as far as your copy-editing, when it is actually copy-editing, thank you. nableezy - 16:56, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

on he.wiki Tomer A. 16:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The one you are looking for lives in Tel Aviv. She adds musical scores to TV programs. Many people mix us up.--Geewhiz (talk) 08:00, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Tomer A. 15:22, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a radical shifting of Turkish foreign policy not only against Israel but also against Cyprus, Syria, Greece, Armenia, Kurdistan (which have the same DNA with Israeli people) and Bulgaria.

There is an addition of pictures into the Israel Turkey relations article that simply reflect the level of anti semitism and religious fundamentalism in the Turkish society which has erupted after the election of Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Definetely the article with the way you edited it is misleading! — Preceding unsigned comment added by IsrArmen (talk • contribs) 10:49, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I contributed in organising a stable article for the Israeli Turkish relations that reflected mostly the positive relations before Turkey becoming a fanatical anti Jews country. However I judge that the photos in my previous version were realistic. I will not revert your edits. However be careful that the article should mention the anti jews policies of Turkish goverment and not trying to hide them because both Turkish and Israeli readers should know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IsrArmen (talk • contribs) 10:58, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper or a political manifesto. The history of relations between countries is not erased by a conflict that began in the last few years. Israel has had a long friendly relationship with Turkey. The current hostility is unfortunate, but does mean we wipe out all mention of the past. Beersheva is full of monuments to the Turks and old Turkish buildings. There is a Turkey-Israel friendship society. Israelis continue to visit Turkey as tourists. Erdogan's policies are not the be-all and end-all of Israel Turkey relations. If you can add sourced information to the article and improve the flow, please do.--Geewhiz (talk) 11:08, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The changes in the article are absolutely misleading and do not show the true face of Turkish aggressive policy towards the goverment of Israel! Please read the sources to EACH section I added in the article and you will understand!!!!! Please do not revert it again! IsrArmen (talk) 20:17, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not meant to repair the relations between the two countries by showing photos and marbles of Attaturk, Turkish soldiers in Israeli cities and towns. The situation changed and does not represent even the 1% of the current relations. Clearly Turkey attacks day by day Israeli interests by boycotting Israel's military and intelligence through its membership in NATO. Turkey uses an indirect way of undermining Israel, something that the Iranians did not achieve it as they had no access to the organisations Turkey has. The article in its previous version was built by various Israeli and international users who have sound facts with sources to base the current situation of the relations. Pleae do not revert it to the previous edition for the sake of all users who are willing to reveal truth about the discrimination against Israeli passports by Turkish airports, Movies that fuel anti semitism, and Hamas leader who visited Turkey. People should know. World should learn it.IsrArmen (talk) 20:34, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/161287

You violated the 1RR there. Please self-revert and work out the dispute on the talk page. nableezy - 15:03, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do. And I may well get involved. However, it is not a false accusation. Your first revert was this which, as you can see from this diff restored the article to a prior state, reverting all the intervening edits. The next revert was this, which reverted Dlv's revert (at least partially). For an example of that edit reverting, search for For the next 36 to 48 hours, in this showing Dlv restoring that phrase and you removing it, again, in this diff. I am not in the habit of making false accusations, and I am not looking to report you for the violation. However, other editors are following the 1RR rule, and you should, based on your past sanctions, know the consequences of not doing so. You can ignore this or you can self-revert, I dont really care. I dont plan on opening a report at AE over it, but if somebody were to do so I would be shocked if your past indefinite block was restored. I dont think that is a fair outcome, so I wont be reporting the violation, but admins at AE may well not look at things in something other than a 1RR violation -> reimpose block mindset. nableezy - 15:57, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry for not understanding these complex explanations. Must be my dyslexia kicking in. Amid all the gobbledygook, this is what I see: The reversion of an IP, which doesn't count and one reversion of dlv, who restored some bits and pieces but basically left the article in shambles. Armed with this avalanche of nonsensical rules that you are such a stickler about, we are seeing a growing cadre of "editors" with brains the size of a pea becoming the world's information scientists and historians. Sad.--Geewhiz (talk) 16:39, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, no, no, no. The first reversion is a reversion of a registered account, Guinsberg (talk · contribs). That counts. There aint an argument to be had here, you clearly violated the 1RR. If you really want me to bring it up at AE I can do that, but Id rather not. As far as pea-sized brains running things, well, I cant say anything civil about that. nableezy - 17:19, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Guinsberg edited on November 13 and an IP edited after him--Geewhiz (talk) 18:02, 15 November 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Ok, and? Your first edit reverted edits by Guinsberg. Your second, within 24 hours, reverted an edit by Dlv. That is 2 reverts. This is not that complicated. nableezy - 19:22, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Gilabrand,

This is an automated friendly notification to inform you that you have been reported for Violation of the Edit warring policy at the Edit warring noticeboard.
If you feel that this report has been made in error, please reply as soon as possible to resolve this issue. However, before contesting an Edit warring report, please review the respective policies to ensure you are not in violation of them. + Crashdoom ^Talk 14:43, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello GIlabrand. The above notice comes from a bot which is merely parsing the 3RR noticeboard to see what complaints have been filed. Responding at

WP:AN3#User:Gilabrand reported by User:Supreme Deliciousness (Result: ). Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 15:42, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

OK, so I'll copy the message here:

Hi. You left me a message about edit warring that seems to be based on a mistake. I made about 25 edits to the Golan Heights article throughout the day which involved copyediting, reordering paragraphs and rearranging photos. An editor removed two photos on the grounds that there were "too many synagogue pictures." I restored two and removed a third, in response to the claim that "three" are too many. All my edits were clearly explained in the edit summary. In what way is this edit warring? Nobody else was working on the page and I was not fighting with anyone.--Geewhiz (talk) 15:23, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should post this comment on

WP:RX 16:37, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello :-) I opened a discussion on the Israeli Jews page about creating a new selection of photos. I saw you showed interest in it in the past so if you would like to participate you are welcome! 94.3.21.223 (talk) 18:02, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:11, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. A few essential pictures that I added to the "Nahal Sorek" title are not showing up. Please instruct me how to complete adding these pictures.

My email is [email protected]. This is were you can see the edit page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nahal_Sorek&action=edit All of the pictures are from my Google Drive. Thanks for everything you do here! --Elad (talk) 18:46, 24 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.78.80.189 (talk) [reply]

Hi Gila! How are you? Do you know about the seminar? It will be in Shfaim. Are you going? I already paid and am ready to go, looking for a tremp meantime. If you don't know, you can read the information here. See you! Alla. --AllaRo (talk) 11:26, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whaw! Denoting a man who Amnesty has called a prisoner of conscience as "known for = Promoting stone throwing and protests"[3] is a new low, even for you.

I will ask to have you sanctioned, if you ever try such a stunt again. Try reading

Is that some kind of threat?--Geewhiz (talk) 17:05, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I am keeping a log of your aggressive comments to me, which is growing quite long. Another one was added today on Hittin.--Geewhiz (talk) 06:00, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I am keeping 3 logs.

• 1) all the times
  WP:RS (like Morris, Palmer) is removed for no given reason. eg:[4]
  ,
• 2) All tendentious edits. eg:[5]
• 3) all unreliable sources added (including blogs) eg:[6].

Those three lists are all growing quite long, too. And believe me: I would really prefer not to see them grow even longer. Cheers, Huldra (talk) 06:17, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like I'm keeping you very busy. Glad to provide you with something to occupy your mind.--Geewhiz (talk) 06:20, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look--IranitGreenberg (talk) 16:39, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is clearly Inappropriate canvassing. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 17:03, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention that there is a whole section devoted to problems with the edit that you did not bother to participate in, User:IranitGreenberg, which is just a continuation of edit warring behavior when 1rr already has been violated in relevant edits. Will put note on your talk page. CarolMooreDC🗽 17:16, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]