User talk:PalestineRemembered/Archives/2008/June


Your question to Ryan

What you may take from the conversation is that JAZ, NK, and TorahTrueJews.com, are currently considered fringe groups and may not be used for sources outside of articles about them. If you have another source which you believe may be problematic from a WP:RS perspective, you are more than welcome to drop me a line on my talk page or via e-mail for comment. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 02:27, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

These groups were considered fringe before your bringing them. As for YY; while your concern for a fellow editor's well-being is to be commended, suffice it to say that he too was very close to a ban for complete disregard for wiki policy. Feel free to ignore my advice, but I believe that if you were to put as much effort in to working with people whose opinions differ from yours, as opposedto against them, you would accomplish much more for the project. For example, my viewpoint tends to differ from that of, shall we say, Eleland or G-Dett, but I think that we have a mutual respect for each other's opinion and are able to work towards compromises. PR, if the facts are well established, you should be able to find it in acceptable sources. If you can only find such "facts" in fringe sources, that ipso facto should tell you how "reliable" those facts are. Thanks. -- Avi (talk) 23:38, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Usual context questions?

I just read your post on my talk page. You twice referred to something "in the usual sense," what does that mean? There's not really an academic definition of in the usual sense. I presume you mean what is purportedly common knowledge and what people often this of as that way. But this is precisely the point of wikipedia, that academic who write most encyclopedia's with their biases and agendas don't have a room here. This same "usual sense" doesn't cut through on wikipedia. What were you looking for beyond the "usual sense"? Lihaas (talk) 06:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I was also looking through the christian and islamic terrorism pages and they link specific attacks and groups. However there is no link for jewish terrorism that lists and then goes on the detailed article.

In the itnerests of consistency and without bias, there should be some place for this. even if not on political violence. (But read my above text regarding a clarification from you, and then we can pursue this) Lihaas (talk) 14:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Bard as an RS

Hi, For historical articles, neither Bard nor the new source are wp:rs. .... Ceedjee (talk) 06:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

There have been (and still are) some terrible sources used in articles, and I suspect Bard is one of them - has there been a discussion anywhere? PRtalk 19:41, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
I don't have any dedicated discussion in mind.
But that's is clear that Bard is not a source. He just has self-published books and articles and is openly defending Israeli interests in the USA.
Rgds, Ceedjee (talk) 08:35, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Uprising

I wrote some things on Nishidani's and Michael's talk pages about this matter. I've seen "insurrection" used to refer to the even more spontaneous first intifada, in Schiff and Ya'ari's book on it, IIRC. About that old matter about NK etc, the place to go for such things is WP:RS/N. Don't have time to write more, probably not for a week.John Z (talk) 16:28, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Jaak

I was approached by Durova to help mentor Jaakobu, and Jaakobu himself asked me to weigh in on certain issues where Durova has less expertise than I do. You would do well to actively seek out and follow Ryan's advice and guidance prior to making contentious edits as well as Jaak has been doing so with Durova. Jaakobu's editing method and his dealings with other editors has greatly improved since he actively sought advice as to how to navigate the shoals of I-P articles; I wish I could say the same for other editors. I will continue to monitor articles and inter-editor behavior, especially within the purview of I-P and related articles, for violations of any guidelines and policies—behavioral as well as content-related, by editors on all sides of the issues. I am almost always available for comment or advice should you wish it as well. Some repeat, and unasked for, advice for you would be to start focusing on adding good, solidly sourced content instead of being preternaturally interested in other editor's conduct and fringe opinions. Thank you, and good luck. -- Avi (talk) 18:59, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


Barnesters

How did you get these things? I don't understand how you stopped editors from making pro-Isreali comments.John26razor (talk) 18:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-06-17 Muhammad al-Durrah

Hello. I'm going to take over this MedCab case and try to work this stuff out. I posted in the talk page what I would like all participants to do to start. Hopefully this all works out well, I have zero intention of leaning towards any one side in this dispute, and I only care about getting it taken care of. Wizardman 18:54, 28 June 2008 (UTC)