User talk:Onceinawhile/Archive 2

Hello, Onceinawhile. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Balfour Declaration at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome!  – Corinne (talk) 02:42, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of annexations since World War II -- PBS (talk) 12:47, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

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)[reply]

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 Shih^Talk 00:03, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

• • 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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 . Zero^talk 00:09, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Palestine

Thank you for quality articles around Palestine, such as preparing

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)[reply]

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1763 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:38, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Two years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:25, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

		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)[reply]

		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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

I left a message to you at

On

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)[reply]

@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[reply]

I have commented at your talk page. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:31, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Okay but have you taken a look? 24.114.106.70 (talk) 17:07, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

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)[reply

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)[reply]

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:

• User:Huldra/Jisr al Majami
• User:Huldra/Maqam Sitt Sukayna
• User:Huldra/Deir Hajla
• User:Huldra/Nabi Bulus
• User:Huldra/Nabi Kifl

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

Is there a way to mention both constructs in the "Palestinian (region)" article?

Yes and we should do the same for

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)[reply

]

On

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)[reply]

On

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)[reply]

On

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)[reply]

On

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)[reply]

Hello, Onceinawhile. When you created the

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)[reply]

I think the larger issue is changing all the redirects to point to the dab. I would think

WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here, and given the dab only has two links, hatnotes would be better. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:35, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

@

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)[reply

]

Also note the thread I started at Talk:British Mandate of Palestine (disambiguation) earlier today. Onceinawhile (talk) 14:07, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I started doing this using DisamAssist. There are still c.2,000 left to go.... Onceinawhile (talk) 05:35, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

A

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)[reply]

With regard to your note here and your edits to the George Bell page, please do see

@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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Please see

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)[reply]

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)[reply

]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

On

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)[reply]

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

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

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

 ■ 21:57, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi, just to tell you...

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

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

I've been following the situation since I first saw it pop up at

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

User_talk:AGK#Topic_ban?) it is not a topic ban violation, Huldra (talk) 21:26, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

(

 ■ 21:29, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

I have stricken my comment accordingly --Shrike (talk) 07:10, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Topic ban lifted

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)[reply]

• See? What did I tell you?

  Happy editing. :) Kurtis ^(talk) 02:48, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

History of Ottoman Palestine

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

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

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)[reply]

List of military occupations

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)[reply]

DYK for Ugaritic texts

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

DYK nomination of Cartography of Jerusalem

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)[reply

]

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

Ethnogenesis discussion

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)[reply]

DYK for Israeli law in the West Bank settlements

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)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Transcription into Chinese

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)[reply]

Hi

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Actually I think I misread your message – I think you meant Talk:Maqam (shrine). Onceinawhile (talk) 18:17, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

DYK for Cartography of Jerusalem

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)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Excellent work at ✉ • ✎) 05:40, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply ]

DYK for Earth's circumference

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)[reply]

1RR vio

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)[reply

]

Your

British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

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)[reply

]

Your

British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument)

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)[reply

]

Nautical mile

Hi Onceinawhile. Just a warning that if you touch

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)[reply

]

Al Aqsa and Chanuyot

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

DYK for Ramesses III prisoner tiles

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)[reply]

Hebrew source

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

@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)[reply]

Yes, indeed, I forgot that I have that already. Incidentally, does the Palestine Order-in-Council deserve an article? Zero^talk 11:01, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Absolutely. I already started to make an image of the cover page. I'll send the whole issue tomorrow. Zero^talk 11:25, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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. Zero^talk 11:55, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dippy

Hello, and wanted to say nice work with the

Dinosaurs live! Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:18, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

@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)[reply]

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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

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)[reply]

p.s.

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)[reply

]

DYK nomination of Dippy (Diplodocus carnegii)

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)[reply

]

DYK for Dippy

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)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

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)[reply]

Note

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)[reply]

Some quote 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

See here and here for examples and discussion. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 18:35, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing about Jordan or Transjordan there.. It was a Jordan-related article. Makeandtoss (talk) 20:40, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Occupation of Ma'an

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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.
• ISBN 0-253-21857-8
  .

Onceinawhile (talk) 08:22, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

1947–1949 Palestine war, even though I hate the title. --Bolter21 (talk to me) 10:49, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

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)[reply

]

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)[reply]

DYK for Abdullah's entry into Transjordan

On

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)[reply]

DYK for Interregnum (Transjordan)

On

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)[reply]

DYK for Sharifian Solution

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)[reply]

page protection

WP:RPP is the usual place to ask. Zero^talk 15:38, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

DYK nomination of Abolition of the Caliphate

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)[reply

]

DYK for Abolition of the Caliphate

On 20 August 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Abolition of the Caliphate, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after the 1924 abolition of the Caliphate (illustration shown), numerous leaders vied unsuccessfully to resurrect the title of caliph for themselves? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Abolition of the Caliphate. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Abolition of the Caliphate), 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) 12:02, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Long overdue

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your comprehensive, well-researched and objectively-presented work at Balfour Declaration, McMahon–Hussein Correspondence, Mandate for Palestine, and numerous other controversial articles, most recently abolition of the Caliphate. Your efforts have considerably improved Wikipedia's coverage of early 20th-century Middle East history and politics. Al Ameer (talk) 16:57, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Mizrahi Jews"

Hello, thank you very much for the edit. As you demonstrated a familiarity with the academic sources, could you please look into the talkpage debate and possibly contribute your opinion? Unfortunately, treatment of the subject in en.wiki suffers from lack of such familiarity. AddMore-III (talk) 04:00, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

image

Any idea what this is? Zero^talk 00:58, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Zero0000: It is on various anti-Palestinian propaganda blogs with the caption “Palestinian security forces salute during a training session in the West Bank city of Tulkarm February 1, 2005. REUTERS/Abed Omar Qusini”

The problem is I can’t find if on the Reuters website where it should be.

If it is not fake, then it was probably taken part-way through a salute maneuver, as this is obviously not how they salute.

Onceinawhile (talk) 07:05, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

McMahon–Hussein Correspondence

Hello, Onceinawhile. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for McMahon–Hussein Correspondence at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 02:23, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Onceinawhile, I've found the lower parts for the article needed more work that the upper parts; I've placed several {{citation needed}} templates today and I removed a rather lengthy quotation in a blue box to the article's talk page. You might be able to use that quotation elsewhere, or integrate it into text, but I think it disrupts the page layout too much so I removed it; feel free to replace it if you wish. Good luck with your planned GA nom. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 02:23, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mandate for Palestine copyedit

MOS:CAPTION. Good luck with FA and all the best, Miniapolis 20:16, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply ]

Your GA nomination of One Million Plan

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

talk) 22:01, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Your GA nomination of One Million Plan

The article

talk) 00:41, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called

page-specific restrictions

, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the

guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here

. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called

page-specific restrictions

, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the

guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here

. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

SPECIFICO talk 17:46, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Fall of the Berlin Wall

On 9 November 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Fall of the Berlin Wall, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the fall of the Berlin Wall (immediate aftermath pictured) was the result of a bureaucratic mistake? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Fall of the Berlin Wall. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Fall of the Berlin Wall), 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, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pothole filler

	Pothole filler
	You saw a hole and you filled it, better than it ever was. And a nice Main Page appearance to boot. Thank you! --- Coffeeandcrumbs 10:02, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

QAI

Agree, perfect timing also! It's - of course - lead news on Portal:Germany, today and until the next image comes. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:35, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Once in a while, you get #2 in the

all-time-DYK-stats, "beating" Frank Sinatra ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:54, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Your GA nomination of One Million Plan

The article

talk) 18:21, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The 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 2019 election, please review NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply ]

Notice of ANI-discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Borsoka (talk) 18:47, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I told you I would take you to AN if you do not report me. One of us is wrong here. Borsoka (talk) 18:50, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Whakaari/White Island article title RM notice

You recently participated in a discussion on the title of the

Talk:Whakaari/White Island if you care to weigh in. —  AjaxSmack  17:46, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

DYK Ocean Wind

With regard to Template:Did you know nominations/Ocean Wind, ALT is fine with me. THanks for your review. Djflem (talk) 07:29, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Byblos figurines, Temple of the Obelisks, Temple of Baalat Gebal

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! --evrik ^(talk) 17:34, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

• FYI - The articles are now ready for a full review, but you should copy edit them some more, add some more facts (i.e. Temple of Baalat Gebal), reference them some more and differentiate some of the language that looks similar between the articles. --evrik ^(talk) 17:37, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Article

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! KAVEBEAR (talk) 06:02, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Moisés Tuʻu Hereveri and Enrique Ika

I responded to your review on DYK for Moisés Tuʻu Hereveri and Enrique Ika. Please let me know what else to do. Thanks. KAVEBEAR (talk) 20:39, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Byblos figurines

On 4 January 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Byblos figurines, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that more than 1,500 Byblos figurines (examples pictured) found in the Temple of the Obelisks and the Temple of Baalat Gebal have become the "poster child" of the Lebanese tourism ministry? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Byblos figurines), 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) 00:01, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Temple of the Obelisks

On 4 January 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Temple of the Obelisks, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that more than 1,500 Byblos figurines (examples pictured) found in the Temple of the Obelisks and the Temple of Baalat Gebal have become the "poster child" of the Lebanese tourism ministry? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Temple of the Obelisks), 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) 00:01, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Temple of Baalat Gebal

On 4 January 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Temple of Baalat Gebal, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that more than 1,500 Byblos figurines (examples pictured) found in the Temple of the Obelisks and the Temple of Baalat Gebal have become the "poster child" of the Lebanese tourism ministry? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Temple of Baalat Gebal), 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) 00:01, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to the 2020 WikiCup

Happy New Year, Happy New Decade and Happy New WikiCup! The 2020 WikiCup began at the start of January and all article creators, expanders and improvers are welcome to take part. If you are interested in joining, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Creative editors like yourself seem to enjoy taking part, and many return year after year. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:18, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of PEF Survey of Palestine

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! Constantine ✍ 15:55, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Template:Did you know nominations/Ocean Wind

Please see note on your DYK review. Yoninah (talk) 23:28, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Ordnance Survey of Jerusalem

On 17 January 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ordnance Survey of Jerusalem, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1864–65 Ordnance Survey of Jerusalem created the first "perfectly accurate" map of the city, and was the impetus for the new Palestine Exploration Fund? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ordnance Survey of Jerusalem. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ordnance Survey 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination for he Holy Land, Syria, Idumea, Arabia, Egypt

Hi,

I have started the review, but I have come back from a long break and am needing to go through the review instructions step-by-step... so it's a work in progress. I'll be in touch.–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:00, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of The Holy Land, Syria, Idumea, Arabia, Egypt, and Nubia

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! –CaroleHenson (talk) 19:34, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

I forgot about the automatic messages. Sorry for the dupe. You did a great job! I love the images.–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:37, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Periodization of Ancient Egypt

On

period names for Ancient Egyptian history, such as "Old Kingdom" and "New Kingdom", are modern inventions? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Periodization of Ancient Egypt. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Periodization of Ancient Egypt), 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) 12:01, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jerusalem maps

Hi, Onceinawhile. I would say the article probably has enough feedback at this point, but there is a complication in that I'm one of the FLC closers. As I supported the FLC, I won't be involved with closing your nomination. If it hasn't been closed by tonight, I'll ping the other closers to remind them that I can't close it. Giants2008 (Talk) 23:26, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of PEF Survey of Palestine

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! BlueMoonset (talk) 02:54, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

DYK nomination of The Holy Land, Syria, Idumea, Arabia, Egypt, and Nubia

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) 21:15, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

You've got mail

Hello, Onceinawhile. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm}} template.Doug Weller talk 18:15, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Just so we're clear...

Your recent AN complaint against an external site outing the real life identities of Wikipedians was not made against the site Wikipediocracy, correct? Carrite (talk) 19:02, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arabian riff

Hi, in case you are still interested in the subject, a few years ago I collected some sources to build the corresponding article on it.wiki, among which a fantasia by Hünten first published in 1845 (here), i.e. before Arban's method, and including the theme. I also created the samples in the article (on sinthesiser of course) --Actormusicus (talk) 18:22, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Actormusicus: thank you. I have brought in most of this from your Italian version. Great work! Onceinawhile (talk) 22:50, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :-) --Actormusicus (talk) 15:25, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for PEF Survey of Palestine

On 5 February 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article PEF Survey of Palestine, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Survey of Palestine was led by the man who "wants you", the man who was too late to save Gordon of Khartoum, a Jack the Ripper suspect, and the police chief who chased him? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/PEF Survey of Palestine. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, PEF Survey of 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for The Holy Land, Syria, Idumea, Arabia, Egypt, and Nubia

On 7 February 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Holy Land, Syria, Idumea, Arabia, Egypt, and Nubia, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that David Roberts's The Holy Land, a collection of 250 orientalist lithographs (example pictured), has been called the most "pervasive and enduring" 19th-century depiction of the East in the West? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Holy Land, Syria, Idumea, Arabia, Egypt, and Nubia. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The Holy Land, Syria, Idumea, Arabia, Egypt, and Nubia), 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) 12:01, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TFL notification

Hi, Onceinawhile. I'm just posting to let you know that

TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 23:18, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

DYK nomination of Old City of Hebron

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! Alex2006 (talk) 11:50, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Nomination for merging of Template:Palestine topics

Template:Ethnic groups in the State of Palestine. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. PPEMES (talk) 15:20, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Nomination for merging of Template:Palestine topics

Template:Palestinian diaspora. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. PPEMES (talk) 15:21, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

DYK nomination of Cartography of Palestine (region)

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! BlueMoonset (talk) 02:00, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Merci beaucoup !

Hello, to you : i'm a French contributor and thanks to you, i translated the article Cartography of Jerusalem (nice job !)... So merci beaucoup ! . Let me know if you see any articles worth translating into my language... Have a nice day ! Sg7438 (talk) 10:40, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sg7438: c'est un excellent travail. Merci beaucoup pour la traduction! Onceinawhile (talk) 11:15, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2nd Helo to you : j'essaie en français, puisque tu m'as répondu dans ma langue ! J'ai traduit ton article Cartography of Palestine... Merci pour ce bel article ! Il manque un livre dans la bibliographie : référence #40 => Masalha 2019 ne renvoie à rien. Pourrais-tu ajouter le livre dans la liste des sources ? Bonne journée ! Sg7438 (talk) 05:56, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sg7438: C'est merveilleux à voir. Merci beaucoup pour la traduction. J'ai ajouté Masalha à votre article. Onceinawhile (talk) 09:15, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Will work or to drop it?

What do you think, worth the while? Is it even possible to have a consensus for my offer? I want a framework for the entire history of the place, but it seems it ain't gonna happen. Already received mails from angry Jews blaming me for being "an enemy from within" and it seems the pro-Palestinians want to turn the entire thing to Palestine which is even worse than what I had to begin with.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 18:22, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bolter21: I really want it to work for the same reason as you do – that it is undoubtedly what Wikipedia's readers want. That it would require real effort on both sides to create a balanced article is exactly the point. There has hardly been any effort on these two articles in the last decade because we all know they are each only being edited by "one side". And that is really not worth anyone's while. The beauty of Wikipedia is bringing together passion and knowledge from opposing sides.

As to will it work, I think the key is in bringing in editors from outside. We would definitely get consensus that there should be a single article, similar to what we got at the 1948 debate. I just haven't figured out how to get consensus to land on an imperfect compromise for the choice of title.

Perhaps we need to implement a system of sequential votes, in an "Exhaustive ballot". Each "round", the least popular choice drops out, and we edge closer and closer to a final decision. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. As far as I remember we didn't get anything with the 1948 war and I fear the same will happen now. It feels like all editors are split on the issue, with the pro-Palestinians saying that "Palestine" is the rightful title for the land and Israel cannot claim history before modern times, while the pro-Israelis are afraid the historical link between the State of Israel and the land of Israel will be cut and will move to Palestine. It seems like none really care solely on just writing the history of the area.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 21:27, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have a different way to solve this. It is going to piss off less Israelis. There is a Palestine (region) article, so maybe change the article "History of Palestine" to "History of the region of Palestine" because "Palestine" is too ambiguous I hope you agree. Although it will still won't have anything other than "Palestine" in the title, it will imply we are not talking about Yasser Arafat's "Palestine" but on a region. I personally don't care about the name too much and I have sources stacking up to make an article about the land which I best like to refer as "that land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River". The lead section will define the land with my loose definition without setting clear boundaries since there are none. It will then state that among the Jewish people this land is known as the Land of Israel and it is also known in the Christian world as the Holy Land. I also saw some scholars call it "Cisjordan" as opposed to "Transjordan". Southern Levant is less appropriate since it includes Transjordan and possibly southern Syria and Lebanon. The access to these articles will be through carefully placed wikilinks. This way, readers who will open the article will have "Land of Israel" shoved straight in their face and they won't be quick to judge. The more the article will keep hinting "this is not Palestinian propaganda" it will be easier for it to be a good article. What do you think?--Bolter21 (talk to me) 22:16, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Bolter21: I am fine with that plan. It would match Demographic history of Palestine (region), although not with Cartography of Palestine and Travelogues of Palestine.

Do you propose to merge the pre-state sections of History of Israel into the article? Onceinawhile (talk) 22:22, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. While trying to remove as much narrative as possible, the Israelite and Jewish history of Israel are quite significant for the history of the State of Israel. At the very least there should be information about Jewish history of the land that is not too extensive in a way that will push an Israeli national narrative but will be satisfactory enough for it not to support a Palestinian narrative that Israel is a Zionist invention. Currently, the article the worst state is actually "History of Israel" which begins more like a manifesto and not an encyclopedic article, but I have moral problems fighting brothers over this. I don't have the patience to be "that guy" right now. I don't know how much this post-modernistic approach is going to catch so I am not engaging in this yet.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 22:59, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Various bridges

Thank you for starting

Jisr Majami! It is way over due... If you are interested in the bridge further north, Jisr al-Sidd, please look at User:Huldra/Jisr al-Sidd

.

Arminden was also interested in that, see User talk:Huldra/Jisr al-Sidd, Unfortunately the history is much more vague when it comes to Jisr al-Sidd, but it definitely deserves an article. One day....Huldra (talk) 22:53, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Herbert Samuel in Transjordan

Discussion moved to Talk:Establishment of the Emirate of Transjordan. Onceinawhile (talk) 06:52, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of First Jordan Hydro-Electric Power House for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article First Jordan Hydro-Electric Power House 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/First Jordan Hydro-Electric Power House until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Infinity Knight (talk) 21:10, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Once, perhaps it would help if you proposed an overall division of information about this region, political as well as electrical, into articles. The division is unclear at the moment. Zero^talk 04:24, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Marathon DYK award

Congratulations on seeing your marathon DYK through, with civility, patience, and scholarly stamina. I find it easy to sympathize with your prolonged toils... HLHJ (talk) 01:26, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HLHJ: thank you! And thanks for the link to the Riyadh book fair article – that was a fascinating read. Onceinawhile (talk) 09:23, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Cartography of Palestine

On 23 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cartography of Palestine, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the cartography of Palestine (example map pictured) has been described as "obsessive"? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Cartography of 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Master article creator

Please whip one up for "The East Jerusalem Hospitals Network" Selfstudier (talk) 13:58, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I started a category: Category:East Jerusalem Hospitals Network. Do you have any good sources explaining what how the network was formed and how it works? Onceinawhile (talk) 14:10, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Look here Selfstudier (talk) 14:14, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

This article seems good, written by the Chairman of the network. Onceinawhile (talk) 15:30, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Selfstudier: I have started here: East Jerusalem Hospitals Network. See what you get with flattery... Onceinawhile (talk) 15:45, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. I linked to it.Selfstudier (talk) 15:49, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Old City of Hebron

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! BlueMoonset (talk) 17:30, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Past consensus?

Heya, I vaguely recall someone (was it you?) saying that there was a past consensus on this phrase that we include all over the place, viz

"The international community considers Israeli settlements in the West Bank illegal under international law but the Israeli government disputes this."

Is it so? Do you know where I can find the discussion? Selfstudier (talk) 09:57, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Selfstudier: see Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration/Current Article Issues/Archive. Legality of Israeli settlements.

Onceinawhile (talk) 08:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That will do nicely, thank you very much. There have been a few attempts to change this so as to include wording about the new US policy (ie that the US "disputes" it as well) and I just want to have a look back and see what went on, forewarned, forearmed and all that.Selfstudier (talk) 08:53, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Urgh, I just ploughed my way though that entire mess and it is my reading that the 2011 consensus was in effect undone by Sandstein in 2012, is that your reading of it as well?Selfstudier (talk) 10:26, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My reading is that consensus was clear then, and there has never been a new consensus. So STATUSQUO remains. Onceinawhile (talk) 11:48, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ain Jalut

What you did there is a blatant attempt to get around a discussion in which your position was not accepted. You should be topic banned for that. JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk) 21:40, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk) 21:53, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of

Ain Jalut

for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

Ain Jalut 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/Ain Jalut until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk) 22:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Socks

It's wise not to give away, except by requested email, your personal clues, Once. It only helps him lift his performance. That is why I never say why, from the word go, I spotted the sockiness. But this is of course not, as it stands, evidence. Just a suggestion.Nishidani (talk) 15:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Umm al-Amad, Lebanon

On 7 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Umm al-Amad, Lebanon, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ernest Renan abandoned his excavations of Umm al-Amad (depicted) in Lebanon when he found that the ruins were only about two thousand years old? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Umm al-Amad, Lebanon. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Umm al-Amad, Lebanon), 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) 00:03, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hebron Old City

Hi, I don't blame you for letting the DYK go, not worth the hassle and the article is still an OK article, DYK or not.

I want to pick your brains, I am a little confused about this https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/israel-seizes-palestinian-municipal-power-for-tomb-of-patriarchs-elevator-626771

Apparently, they are confiscating some property from the Islamic Waqf (sounds like a problem to me) and then the claim is that they will make a disabled access to the Mosque. Do you know off the top of your head how the bits fit together? Hebron/Old City/Waqf. If not no problem I will hunt around but I think its worth writing this up somewhere.

Selfstudier (talk) 11:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Selfstudier: The best diagram I have is: File:Hebron H2 area 2011-ochaopt.jpg. And then detail in this document.[4] Onceinawhile (talk) 11:57, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

WP:ONUS

No, I don't think anything was ever actually implemented as a result of that discussion, even though there seemed to have been a lot of ideas that had general consensus. I'm probably too busy to pay close attention to it right now, but you could always poke at it and then try one of them to see if anyone objects. --Aquillion (talk) 03:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Jisr Majami

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) 16:01, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

place names

Hi, I sent you a bundle of sources by email. Zero^talk 05:43, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hebraization of Palestinian place names

User:Onceinawhile, I wanted to personally thank you for creating the Wikipedia page, Hebraization of Palestinian place names. One suggestion: Usually, in Wikipedia articles, the section entitled "Bibliography" is placed after the section that contains the "References." Again, this is a very good page to have on Wikipedia, and, needless to say, more can be said as to why it was deemed "necessary," in some cases, to restore a site's Old Hebrew appellation. We ought to remember, furthermore, whenever discussing this subject, that a change of name does not necessarily mean a change of place. In most cases, generations of Arabs living in Palestine did an excellent job in preserving a semblance of the Old Hebrew names of ancient Jewish towns and villages, without which many of the sites would have been lost to historical geographers. We owe them gratitude for that. One question that I'd like to ask you, however, is why you felt it necessary to place the "ARBPIA" template on the Talk-Page, when the article is, basically, non-political and addresses place-names from a historical context?--Davidbena (talk) 02:26, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Davidbena: thank you for your comment. It is a fascinating subject - I was surprised to see just how many high quality academic sources have covered it in detail. And I keep finding more. I have moved the bibliography section as you suggest. I have also removed the ARBPIA tag - I like to think that it should be non-political as well. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:27, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great! This is an outstanding start for what will be an even better article, once all the data is collected. Thanks, again, for creating this page.Davidbena (talk) 12:35, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete DYK nomination

talk) 03:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

DYK nomination of First Jordan Hydro-Electric Power House

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! --evrik ^(talk) 16:42, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onceinawhile/Archive_2&oldid=1048419657"