User talk:Yidisheryid

The Signpost
12 December 2024

NYC meetup change of schedule

It's been agreed that we should have a 2-hour formal meeting period to start organizing meta:Wikimedia New York City, and this will be held at the Pacific Library (note this is different from the Brooklyn Central Library, which was discussed earlier) from 2:00 PM – 4:00 PM.

This shouldn't affect you directly since you can't come till later anyway, but if you have any topics or proposals (or any updates on CYCO), I'll be glad to present them at the formal meeting on your behalf. And of course there will still be more informal discussions later in the evening at the museum. Next time I promise we'll find a time and place for a formal meeting that is accessible to everyone.--Pharos 21:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the note, regarding CYCO they don't seem to have a problem with giving it out for the free and open medium, the volunteers will have to come from the colleges and universities where Yiddish is teach, since they have the tools of scanning and converting it into text.--יודל 15:02, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So, I presume you talked with them, then. Did you get a chance to look at their books? Thanks.--Pharos 18:01, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Cover mishpatei k.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Cover mishpatei k.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:29, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks i will now make better use of the templates.--יודל 15:15, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It has nothing to do with the templates, per se. You are in violation of WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFCC#Unacceptable images. Fair-use only applies to the image itself. You may only claim fair-use about the book cover if you are discussing the book. You may not claim fair-use of the book cover to discuss the organization that publishes the book. -- Avi 21:31, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
the organization is defined by printing this book--יודל 12:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be misunderstanding Wikipedia's fair-use policy. Please review it, and note the portions that I specifically highlighted above. It is incorrect to say that the "organization is defined by its books." If the article specifically discusses a particular book, then you may have a fair-use case. Otherwise, there is no valid fair use here. Sorry. -- Avi 14:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
u don't have to be sorry just don't be a the fair use prosecutor and everything will be alright. this image is clearly within fair use, since the article is all about the image and we cannot understand fully the subject without it, this org is specifically and exclusively about this book.--יודל 15:01, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Part of my responsibilities as a sysop is to protect wikipedia against claims of copyright violation, which this seems to be. The article is perfectly understandable without the image; whether the article's subject is notable enough for wikipedia is an andere shayla L'Gamri. Part of what you, and every editor, agrees to when editing wikipedia is to abide by its rules, which you currently seem not to be doing. It is no longer a question of chisaron Yediya (lack of knowledge) as I have supplied you with both the references and the explanations. -- Avi 16:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
u r totally mixed up with the meaning of a sysop, u have no other obligation and job more than the ordinary user, other than safe guarding vandalism and other policys, yes u have used the tools as u wished against others but doing it does not make it right. u r wrong and please stop arguing that u know better becaouse that does not give any leverage to the argument, this article is written by me and i tell u that it is about the image, and in such a case an image is needed and allowed within the fair use ratinale.--יודל 16:42, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Once again you demonstrate a severe lack of knowledge and understanding of wikipedia policies and guidelines. You have misread, misunderstood, or ignored WP:FAIR, WP:HOAX, WP:NPA, WP:CANVASS, and now Wikipedia:Administrators. Continued refusal to conform to wikipedia policies and guidelines, be it through negligence and apathy, or intentional maliciousness, will be met with steps taken to protect the integrity of the wikipedia project. Thank you. -- Avi 18:33, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Amah.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Amah.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks i will now make better use of the templates.--יודל 15:15, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See above. -- Avi 21:33, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ok but the whole idea of the man is his accomplishment in the book.--יודל 12:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See above. Wikipedia's rules are very strict in this area, I am afraid. -- Avi 14:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
i am sorry u r so afraid but this is indeed within the fair use rationale so there is no need to be scared.--יודל 15:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am not certain you are correct. -- Avi 16:27, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Than let others who are certain deal with it. thanks--יודל 16:44, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was being polite; this is a violation. -- Avi 18:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Unfortunately "fair use" is a legal term defined by courts, and by lawyers who may sometimes interpret narrowly out of fear of courts. The Wikimedia Foundation's lawyers have provided for a narrower definition than many users have wanted. Sometimes, what people think the "fair use" law requires may have little to do with what you or I may think is fair. It may even seem unfair. This may be one of those times. Best, --Shirahadasha 02:34, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
thanks--יודל 11:39, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should have kept

I hope you archived or kept the discussion with our friend somewhere. If he edits any Israel articles in a COI way, there is much evidence there that can demonstrate a determined and unrepentant COI that he admits to puting above the rules of wikipedia. Basejumper2 16:11, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I put in the archives and i will label it by dates so it would be easy to find. thanks--יודל 16:12, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure guys, as if the two of you are "saints", and I'll be keeping an eye out if I come across any funny edits from either of your ends, count on hearing from me. "Love" is a two-way street. But I cannot waste all this time here when there is so much editing to be done. Try it, instead of trying to lay "traps" and other such childish "tricks". IZAK 03:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks--יודל 13:28, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello badge

Hi. I made a Wiki Hello badge in case anyone's interested in using it for the Meetup. It's on the Meetup page. Nightscream 16:44, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CYCO Encyclopedia

So, I presume you talked with them, then. Did you get a chance to look at their books? Thanks. (apologies for posting this twice, it seems you missed my message in the section above)--Pharos 17:40, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yes i looked at it, it is phenomenal work, but they have not decided yet to give it away, once we have a project of volunteers and the tools we should be able to have it.--יודל 17:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

regarding avi's speedy deletion

I would like to document how avi uses his tools which i don't have, he has erased an article speedely. see discussion below--יודל 22:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks and incivility

Unsubstantiated personal attacks and incivil comments, such as you made here are forbidden in wikipedia. Please desist; otherwise, measures will be taken to protect the project. Thank you. -- Avi 21:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I answered there why it is not a personal attack, please do not bring this discussion to many different places i will answer u further there thanks--יודל 22:33, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Once again Avi threatens of using tools against me

Please note that i made this headline above since this user lives me negative headlines on my talk page so others who don't read the essence of the note should think i am negative, i was the one who made avis headline a sub header. thanks--יודל 18:22, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Once again...

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shwartzman Etrogs. Once again, I would like to ask you to review wikipedia's policy on notability. Your analogy is flawed; both Pepsi and Coke are notable companies in-and-of-themselves. (Zich Alayn). Shwartzman's is not. There have been a large number of times where your comments in AfD's and other places indicate that you still lack a fundamental understanding of English Wikipedia policy. You have had plenty of opportunities to educate yourself. Please be aware that further disregard for the policies and guidelines of wikipedia, and basic respect for those policies, as well as your fellow editors, may require further actions to protect the project. Thank you. -- Avi 16:11, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Schwartzman is a brand name more popular in its field than Pepsi or coke.--יודל 17:37, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy notice

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Yidisheryid -- Avi 21:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have nothing to add, last time u have done this i was blocked for attacking u back, i am smarter to day and i wont answer hopefully the community can read through your words. thanks--יודל 12:34, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slight edit to your userpage

[1] I don't think I broke anything with that edit, but it was causing a strange little blip on the screen. Just letting you know; I'm generally hesitant to mess with people's userpages for anything other than fixing a broken userbox. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:46, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Jewish0utreachBookCover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jewish0utreachBookCover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Jews Against Zionism book.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jews Against Zionism book.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:12, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your sig

Please consider making your signature readable in English. Please keep in mind that signatures are used to easily identify each other in discussions. Since this is an international encyclopedia, other alphabets present difficulties for majority. `'Míkka>t 04:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As much as i love and respect your opinion, i don't see that the community is bothered by it. But Thanks so much for your input, if its annoying i do not wish to continue with it. כל טוב--יודל (talk) 11:58, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yiddish stub

Hi Yidisheryid: As one of Wikipedia's Yiddish experts you may be interested that I recently created a {{Yiddish-stub}} but it has now been nominated for deletion, see Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2007/December/20. What do you think? Sincerely, IZAK (talk) 00:55, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification, it is indeed a great idea.--יודל (talk) 11:56, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

pronunciation

Dear יודל, how does one pronuciate the name of the צאנז hasidic dynasty - with an "s" or with a "ts" ? Thank you, FigPicker (talk) 00:19, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

don't know, i would write ts because if i am not mistaken most of the time צ is translated with ts. --יודל (talk) 10:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks. FigPicker (talk) 20:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff Ballabon

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Jeff Ballabon, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=933172. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:01, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Jeff Ballabon

A tag has been placed on Jeff Ballabon requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Redfarmer (talk) 17:02, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article is based on the Haaretz article hopefully i will have time i will try to change the text it should not appear as copy right breach--יודל (talk) 17:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Jeff Ballabon

An editor has nominated Jeff Ballabon, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Ballabon and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:59, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

You are completely mistaken regarding the closing of AfD's. I withdrew it. You may renominate if you wish. -- Avi (talk) 13:20, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I answer u on your talk page the mistake isn't mine--יודל (talk) 13:21, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will say it again; it does not matter. Your option is to re-nominate the article if you wish, but reverting administrator actions is considered disruptive editing and continued violations may result in measures being taken to protect the project. Your option is to re-nominate the article, if you wish. -- Avi (talk) 13:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
U r not administartor here since u r involved in this u have the same power as me re this--יודל (talk) 13:25, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, you are mistaken. Regardless, your option now is to renominate. Merely reversing the edits will not re-load the article to AfD. This is another example of how you seem to choose to ignore Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Avi (talk) 13:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is one example how u revert me 2 times and i will not revert u again not to play into your low blows. have the last word here and be happy--יודל (talk) 13:29, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again, if you would like the article deleted, renominate it for deletion. Overturning administrator actions is 1) a violation of WP:DISRUPT and 2) may not have the article properly listed on the appropriate pages. Further, personal attacks such as "low blow" are completely inappropriate. I have asked you tens of times over the past months to review and understand wikipedia policy before making edits; you seem to completely ignore them. Continued behavior as such may result in preventative measures being taken. -- Avi (talk) 13:32, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If u think that u can use your administrator tools like this in the long term u will be surprised that u r mistaken. bottom line is, yes u have initially nominated it for deletion, but since i have seconded the nomination, it is no more yours than mine, and u have no right to close it afterwards which u did, while taunting your sysop status as if this gives u the right above me to revert me, but there is no need now to implicate myself here in acting like u by reverting it since i strongly hope the community has eyes--יודל (talk) 13:34, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And again you demonstrate what is beinning to look like a willful disregard for understanding wikipedia policy. You did not nominate the article for deletion, you expressed an opinion. There is only one nominator for any AfD. Please stop your personal attacks, misrepresentation of wikipedia policy, and disruptive editing. -- Avi (talk) 13:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree we had already this issue before and it was clearly stated by consensus that 2 peaple can indeed nominate an article for deletion. i have done so and i did not retract it, there was even a third nominator but since he was for a speedy delete i disagreed it with it.--יודל (talk) 13:57, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are misunderstanding deletion process. Only one person nominates an article for deletion. Everyone else casts a vote, not a nomination. Seraphim Whipp 14:06, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok i disagree and so do others i will now except that 2 people have expressed their opinion on this, i will wait for the community to change this into policy. thanks for both of u for your valued time and energy to come to this point that 2 people cannot nominate an AFD and if the first one decides to retract it he can still do it even though many have also nominated it. have a good day--יודל (talk) 14:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What I still find incredulous is your persistence in harrassment for harassment's sake. If you were solely interested in how to handle the the Jeff Ballabon article, I already suggested to you much earlier that all you have to do is relist it. That is the proper procedure. However, you do not relist it, but firstly attempt to re-open a closed debate and then make unfounded allegations of improper behavior. Is there any other explanation for your behavior other than a willfuld disregard of wikipedia's policies regarding deletions, user behavior, and civility? Please educate me. -- Avi (talk) 14:14, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will not educate u and u stop educating me--יודל (talk) 14:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

« שמועס »

Dear friend please come to ‎« שמועס »‎ to see if we can use this channel as a place for Yiddish chats. This form should work at ‎װיקיװערטערבוך‎ when you are using Firefox, Konqueror or Opera. Unfortunatelly if does not work yet in Internet Explorer.‎
Please search in ‎װיקיװערטערבוך:הויפט זייט‎ at the seventh item in נאוויגאציע.‎ It is ‎« שמועס »‎.‎ I assume that you agree to add such an « שמועס » item at ‎װיקיפּעדיע‎‎ to נאוויגאציע as soon as our friends m:n:en:user:bawolff ... have fixed the code. Please do not hesitate to write your comments in the comment section.‎
Please make proposals about translating of the text / help: Only Latin characters and Latin numbers are allowed as « Your Nickname: » . Exceptions are « tekhniker|avek » , « ales-viser » etc. Please add some explanations about accessing the channel « #kavehoyz » by using the page chatwikizine: One should select the channel « #kavehoyz » from the channel list, select a Nickname and hit enter. All other fields are optional.‎
Thanks in advance and Good luck! Best regards
‫·‏לערי ריינהארט‏·‏T‏·‏m‏:‏Th‏·‏T‏·‏email me‏·‏‬ 05:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature

Hi, I have noticed that you use a signature with non-latin characters, and there is nothing in the rules that says this is not allowed. However, non-Latin scripts (such as Arabic, Armenian, Chinese, Cyrillic, Greek, Hebrew, Indic scripts, Japanese, Korean, Thai and others) are illegible to most other contributors of the English Wikipedia. As a courtesy to the rest of the contributors, I'd like to ask if could sign your posts (at least in part) with Latin characters to avoid confusion. If you'd like more information on this WP:SIG#NL and Wikipedia:Username#Non-Latin may be of interest to you. Thanks--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 13:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am now aware that this is a major anoyence to readers i feel bad that i made the community go through this unruly stand-outish behavior of mine i am wrong and i changed it thanks for commenting on this so nicely, love and peace yours truly--YY (talk) 13:46, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re Anonymity

Dear Yidisheryid

Thanks for your note. My point about anonymous contributions is that, in terms of justice, people have the right to know who is making accusations against them. Otherwise we are back to the Star Chamber, Spanish Inquisition etc model of anonymous denunciation. Anonymity is only a good thing if it protects free voices or whistle-blowers from oppression, which is clearly not the case here.

Yours

Ed —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ed O'Loughlin (talk • contribs) 08:05, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Avis constant relentless attacks on this talk page

i have lost count how many times Avi has put warnings (while i disagreed with him on other issues, he claims this is no conflict of interest) on my my talk page that i must be blocked, beware he opened over 3 ANI cases against me already that i remember. here he goes again: read the next header and notice--YY (talk) 21:36, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks and incivility

I would like to remind you about our policies against personal attacks and incivility. There is no excuse for using invective or derogatory statements such as chutzpah or "stooping to your level" in wikipedia. That is even more so when the actions involved were bringing an article in line with the accepted Manual of Style. You were cordially invited to comment, and instead decided to resort to ad hominem attacks. That does not foster the atmosphere necessary for solving these issues. I have given you valid policy- and guideline-based reasons for my edits, and your responses attacking me personally are neither in the spirit of cordial discourse nor allowed under those same policies and guidelines. Please review them, and keep them in mind in the future. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 21:21, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chutspe is a name of conduct: when i try to solicit outrage from the community on conduct that is against policy i call it by its name, if its name is a personal attack i am willing to delete it, meanwhile u have attacked me that i am guilty of many sins which i disagree and i haven't yet accused u of any sin personally so the comment here is of a much more bigger pattern of behavior, and no i reassure u i will not stoop to your level to post this hateful warnings as if u have broken some policies, on your talk page. but i beg u not to besmirch my talk page--YY (talk) 21:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Rev"s

Good question. We've got Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies)#Honorific prefixes, which isn't really crystal clear itself. Basically, I guess it comes down to what the name the individual is best known by is. Billy Graham is best known by that name, so he doesn't have the "Rev." In most cases, I think that most individuals are best known without the "Rev.", particularly in those Christian churches which use "Father" or "Pastor" instead.

I would guess in only those cases where the individual is so regularly referred to as a "Rev." that it would be unusual to not refer to him as such would it be used. No specific examples come to mind though. For cases in which it's a secondary subject with the same name, maybe John Adams (clergy) or similar would work best. That's referring only to the title of the article, though. Clearly, the first words of the article itself can always include "Reverend" if that's desirable. Any particular instances you're thinking of? John Carter (talk) 00:14, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks John for your kind response with some insight in this issue, i was taking interest since there was a user named malick shabbaz who claimed to have some authority in declaring that a professional encyclopedic subject about rev's should never have the word reverend in the lede of the article, therefore also the rabbis should be deleted from its lede, by rabbis i know that the Yiddish and Hebrew project do indeed write the word rabbi in the lead, so i was trying to see if by the revs there is any formulated style, as i see this has no clear cut answer. thanks very much for trying to shed some light here. good day--YY (talk) 12:05, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zionist intolerance

Hello! Rabbi or Mr. Yidisheryid. I am relativelly new in the Wikipedia, but I see that the Zionists made themselves very comfortable here, and are attacking everyone that believes different then them. I have created the Yishuv haYashan article, which is something important historically speaking. I see they are trying to remove any information about the Haredim who didn't participate in the Zionist movement. Furthermore the whole history of the Yishuv haYashan Kollelim was ignored but instead an article about Halukka in a negative spotlight. They are trying to persuade that all those who did for our brothers in Eretz Yisroel were Zionists. I would suggest that we incorporate in a WikiProject:Yishuv haYashan or WikiProject:Torah Judaism in order to clearify the facts.

HagiMalachi (talk) 16:33, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Betawiki

Hi. With the release of MediaWiki 1.13 coming up, I would like to ask you if you can please translate/correct the most often used messages for yi as soon as possible. Thanks! Siebrand (talk) 20:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sde Tzofim Yeshiva

thanks for your welcome. The Yated ran an article about the Sde Tzofim Yeshiva about two weeks befor purim.Yag732 (talk) 16:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

tnx. in order to save the article please put this source in the subject page not here on my talk page--YY (talk) 15:03, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Judaism Newsletter

This newsletter was automatically delivered because you are a member of one or more Judaism related WikiProjects. If you would like to opt out of future mailings, please remove your name from this list.

Speedy deletion of Denis Waitley

A tag has been placed on Denis Waitley requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Ged UK (talk) 16:02, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

he is a best selling author with endless results about him in google searches, what else do u need to see that he is indeed notable? i understand that i must bring the sources but to go speedily and delete before bothering to see that his name is broadly discussed in hundreds of websites all yet while he is allready mentioned in other wikipedia articles is ludicrous. pls provide me a copy so i can fix whatever concern there may be outstanding like independent resources establishing the claim that he is indeed a notable figure thanks--YY (talk) 16:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You'll need to ask an administrator. There's a link to the list of admins who will do this in the message above. Ged UK (talk) 18:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CRC

As for the CRC, see: http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/rabbinicalcourts/crc/statements/index.cfm . We will talk later. I work 45 hours per week, my job is very hectic and my life is very full - I lack the time to get involved ine xtensive arguments here. However, I may remind you, I am affiliated with Dushinsky myself and I assure you that Dushinsky is very anti-Zionist. Some people I know think Dushinsky and Neturei Karta are the same... --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 07:57, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First of all as for the CRC, yes they are anti Zionist but they aren't a different entity than satmar why include every org and organ of satmar separately in the cat? And as for dushinsky, yes u r right, some are no doubt very anti Zionist but that isn't the rule for most as i told u in dushinsky bnei brak they even speak and teach in the Zionist language Hebrew with the young kids but since in Jerusalem they participate in all the demonstrations like toldos ahron i will not revert it for now although i fail to understand why isn't it good the cat eidah and eidah is in the anti cat allready why double categorize and inflate superficially the cat anti Zionists? Think it over i will wait for an answer a week, meanwhile make a lot of money--YY (talk) 13:39, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou very much

THANKYOU SO MUCH Yidisheryid for your Excellent Translation effort!
I am very very Grateful.
May God Bless You!
If you want any of your favourite article to be translated into the Chinese language, then I would certainly be glad help you.
Yours Sincerely, From --Jose77 (talk) 03:53, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Judaism Newsletter

This newsletter was automatically delivered because you are a member of one or more Judaism related WikiProjects. If you would like to opt out of future mailings, please remove your name from this list. As always, please direct all questions, comments, requests, barnstars, offers of help, and angry all-caps anti-semitic rants to my talk page. Thanks, and have a great month. L'Aquatique[approves|this|message] 20:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shalom

please see this aticle Chaim Walkin and rate it's importance if you feel so. --Korach (talk) 11:11, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks--YY (talk) 14:41, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Avraham 3

Hi there. Just wanted to let you know that support #31 was indeed a support. The oppose bit was, as far as I can tell, intended to be sarcastic. Cheers, –Juliancolton | Talk 15:36, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hope u can leave out your interpetation. Oppose means oppose and support means suport. i will not go into a edit fight with u but pls be honest and revert your change--YY (talk) 15:42, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to butt in, but there's a reason it's in the "Support" area...Cheers. I'mperator 16:29, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
there may be a reason. the reasons can be numerous. but(t) a sopport header should belong in the support cat--YY (talk) 16:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi YY. My "oppose" was indeed meant as a joke - I am supporting Avraham. The hidden comment on my vote, which itself is in the support section, says this as well. I'm sorry if this was confusing. FlyingToaster 16:32, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for clarifying your vote please underestand that Avi is in my veiw a beloved and very carefull user but power to him is something that i would never ever entrust beause i have been intimidated by him and tried to reason with him and untill this day he has never ever answwered my private emails and only used it against me! i feel he is here more for the power than for the good alltough his good to the project is my veiw more than all users togather--YY (talk) 16:37, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The Bund on Wikipedia" Project

Shalom,

I am writing to you today wondering if you would like to participate in the newly formed "The Bund on Wikipedia" Project. I do not know if you have any knowledge or interest in the General Jewish Labour Union, but hopefully you do. You can reply on my talk page. More preferably, email me at eliscoming@aol.com. Thanks. http://bundwiki.weebly.com/ --Eliscoming1234 (talk) 04:46, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The Bund on Wikipedia" Project Task Force
--Eliscoming1234 (talk) 03:35, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Yiddish Wikipedia

I have nominated Yiddish Wikipedia, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yiddish Wikipedia. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:30, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Religious text primary

A TFD has been opened on Template:Religious text primary. The TfD was opened on 2 December; so is due to close in two days time. Notification being sent to all participants in the previous discussion Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2008_July_30#Template:BibleAsFact. Jheald (talk) 23:44, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AJOP

I am currently writing a paper on AJOP and I saw that you were one of the main contributors to the page. Some of the information on the page has no clear cited source, so I am not sure who wrote it. I, obviously, can only state things in my paper that I can back up, so I was wondering if you know much about the topic, you would be willing to talk more about it with me.

Thank you.

SaychelTov (talk) 05:56, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

help

I'd love if you help me improve this article I wrote: User:Yosichen/Jewish views on marital relations Yosichen (talk) 07:13, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for help

Hi,

A certain person on Wikipedia is reverting edits without further discussion, namely here:

Talk:Amalek#Armenians as Amalekites - bias in favour of Holocaust deniers

I request your help here, as this user just does not respond.

Thanks --92slim (talk) 17:25, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To avoid confusion, I wanted to clarify that it's the user who first posted in response to me in the said talk page, in the above mentioned section. --92slim (talk) 17:35, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Moshe Weinberger

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Moshe Weinberger, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:46, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Association for Jewish Outreach Programs for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Association for Jewish Outreach Programs 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/Association for Jewish Outreach Programs 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. FuriouslySerene (talk) 19:36, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Moshe Weinberger for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Moshe Weinberger 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/Moshe Weinberger (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. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:04, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Avrohom Katz

Notice

The article Avrohom Katz has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not seem to meet WP:BIO guidelines.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Yaakovaryeh (talk) 21:49, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]