I'm not sure what the best approach is. I'm am the moment trying to work out how best to deal with some particularly bad POV editing and original research on [[Arab citizens of Israel]] (a persistently problem-prone article), and find myself equally at a loss. The easiest option is to leave them to it, not sure whether that is the best option or not (I mean, obviously it is for you and me, but should we take a more altruistic perspective, and is there any point?). [[User:Palmiro|Palmiro]] | [[User talk:Palmiro|Talk]] 19:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure what the best approach is. I'm am the moment trying to work out how best to deal with some particularly bad POV editing and original research on [[Arab citizens of Israel]] (a persistently problem-prone article), and find myself equally at a loss. The easiest option is to leave them to it, not sure whether that is the best option or not (I mean, obviously it is for you and me, but should we take a more altruistic perspective, and is there any point?).
Specifically with regard to that material in the [[Bethlehem]] article, I think one consideration is whether the particular topic is being given undue weight in the article. Arguably it is. One problem with taking it out is that you would be criticised for "removing sourced material", a criticism which appears to be untrumpable however biased the material (or even within certain bounds the sources) are. [[User:Palmiro|Palmiro]] | [[User talk:Palmiro|Talk]] 19:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Regarding the lynching and the article by Gideon Levy... Btw, next time your people decide to butcher someone, can you consider him instead ? I'll appreciate if you pass the message to your local hamas representative, I can make a list. Cheers. Amoruso09:41, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dome of the Rock
Amuroso and others like to use uncredible citations to spam the Dome of the Rock article. First they insisted that the Dome is not "Masjid Qubbat As-sakhra". That is it is not a masjid. Sencond that it is a shrine built most likely by Jews and for Jews and that Jews were praying their along with muslims etc blah blah.....
Of course, I improved the article by bringing the relevant story of the construction from the preserved historical sources by muslim scholars and others. See for example this article which is commonly used and information from is commonly utilized to spam both al-Masjid al-Aqsa and Masjid Qubbat As-sakhra articles [1]. The discussions are long as you may see at the corresponding talk pages. Citing uncredible and unusual claims does not nmake sense and should not be given equal wait. Plus the Dome is a masjid as it is known and not a Shrine, or Maqam or Mashhad as they like to call it! Thanks. Almaqdisi15:54, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
These are personal attacks ("spamming articles...") Almaqdisi that aren't allowed on wikipedia. Refrain please from making BS claims. Amoruso01:18, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree with Almaqdisi, a lot of credible evidence show that the Dome of Rock is intact the place where a masjid not a shrine was built.Palestine4802:36, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unspecified source for Image:ManarahSmall.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:ManarahSmall.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
Hey Ramallite, thanks a lot for supporting me in my recent RfA. It succeeded, and I am very grateful to all of you. If you ever need help with anything, please don't hesitate to ask. Also, feel free point out any mistakes I make! Thanks again, —Khoikhoi05:06, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Har Homa
I find the idea that "'widely considered' alone should merit this category" to be very interesting since similar logic isn't employed with regards to other categorisations like Category:Terrorists or Category:Terrorism. It seems that if anything short of acknowledgement (which exists regarding Israeli areas in the West Bank outside unilaterally expanded Jerusalem) isn't enough to categorise a group like Hamas as "terrorist," then it is only fair that an area whose status as a "settlement" is disputed not be categorised as such. Let me know what you think, TewfikTalk06:49, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad to help you fullfil your mission, and I trust that I'll be able to be of assistance more often.
The "fringe minority" that you've discounted includes at minimum the Israeli government, the municipality of Jerusalem, and in my experience, most residents of such places, who have little or no cognisance of the political controversy, especially since it is treated the same as every other part of Jerusalem. Thus, the status of newly constructed neighbourhoods in the parts of Jerusalem annexed since 1967 are not universally recognised as "settlements," and as such should not be categorised as such. This is actually very similar to the practice regarding Category:Terrorists. Hamas is categorised as Category:Designated terrorist organizations because it is, and despite that it still isn't included in any of the categories that I mentioned above, because they are disputed (notably by Hamas). As an aside, I'm surprised that you think you cannot approach or live in areas like Har Homa due to your religion or ethnicity, as I recall you making a post on Talk:Har Homa discussing the trend of Palestinians with Jerusalem residency actually moving into places like this. I'm going to remove the categorisation for the reasons above, but I'm still open to any feedback you may have. Cheers, TewfikTalk19:43, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I just saw your reply on my Talk, and I've responded to you and Palmiro on Talk:Har Homa. On a personal note, this has absolutely nothing to do with minimising the difficulties faced by many Palestinians or denying their humanity. Whatever you may think, I am absolutely committed to NPOV, as I recognise now more than ever the subjectivity inherent in all of us. Ultimately we will end up with a fair and just representation if and only if we are faithful to the WP policies. And despite what you may think, I assure you that I am very much able to relate to the "Palestinian experience." All the best, TewfikTalk05:35, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Could you put your comments on the new lead on this page? I wrote it to respond to some of the more major complaints about the page. Elizmr13:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I've just noticed that you recently left a templated userpage message. I'm just bringing to your attention that the format and context of these templates will be shortly changing. It is recommended that you visit WikiProject user warnings and harmonisation discussion pages to find out how these changes could affect the templates you use. We also would appreciate any insights or thoughts you may have on the subject. Thanks for your understanding. Best regards Khukri(talk . contribs)14:16, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Portal Palestine on wp:fr
Hello Ramallite.
We have already crossed each other some times when I contributed here on the wp:en. Now I only contribute on the wp:fr because I feel there are less controverses around the palestinian israeli conflit. fr:guerre civile en Palestine de 1947-1948 will soon become featured article with positive comments from both israelis, jewish, arabs and external editors. fr:protagonistes de la guerre de Palestine de 1948 is already one.
We are going to deal with fr:exode palestinien and we parellely develop the {{fr:portail Palestine}}...
We would be very grateful to you if you could find some palestinian citizen fluent in French who could come and try with us to bring the Palestinian point of view in some/all of there articles and to develop the portal. I think this lacks very very much to the project on the French side.
Thank you for your help. Best Regards fr:user:ceedjee
police/universities
A long time ago, you dismissed the notion of the universities built for Palestinians as well as the training of police. After some later research, here is what I found slightly more in depth: After Oslo, only the Israeli military and new PA police police are the only armed forces allowed to operate in the west bank and gaza. And yes then after oslo, Israel for a time did help train police. Another source says it was 7 universities that had been three-teacher training institutions before were sponsored in part by the Israeli government and Jewish donors. If you choose not to believe it, its fine, you are within your rights. --Shamir119:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC) PS, have you seen the documentary Promises?[reply]
What?
I don't know why you always think im attacking you. Why do u accuse me of "painting you as an intolerant revisionist"? I wasnt. After I read that info, i thought i might share it with you, nothing i said was offensive. When I said, you dismissed it, it was because (at least i thought) you did, which again, is okay. And there is no need for the sarcasm when I say you are within your rights to such thoughts (When working towards a peace settlement, planning a massive wave of violence would probably not be in someone's favor in terms of the consequences on rights). Unfortunately, it is not so much that your rights may be limited as a Palestinian, but moreover as an Arab. Such restrictions exist in absolutely every single Arab country; and i dont even have to tell you which arabs in the middle east and n. africa have by far the most rights.
To remind you again, i wasnt intending to engage in much of a political discussion when i contacted you last. It was surprising for me when i saw your answer criticizing me. If you wish, i am willing to at least be on good terms with you. I dont want to be painted as an intolerant revisionist either. We don't know each other, and at least on my part i can say i dont hate you. If you want to know anything about me (political, individual, whatever), i dont mind and i hope you dont either. Peace. --Shamir121:29, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:RamallahMeetingHouse.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr19:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Shechem Ruin.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Shechem Ruin.gif. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr18:52, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bassam Shakaa
Hello Ramallite,
I didn't see the reference in front of my eyes, and actually spent a bit of time unsuccessfully searching for one, which is why I made the mistake about the injury. However I still believe that there is too much space dedicated to the passage when a brief summary would suffice (more than that in the Bassam Shakaa article, though it is admittedly too short an article) in what is after all an article about a city. Let me know, TewfikTalk04:42, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hope all is well with you and your loved ones.
What a fucked up situation.
I feel bad. I am sure you feel this way when there is a pigua.
In my eyes there is no diffrence if it takes place in Ramalla or Tel-Aviv.
Best, Zeq19:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
An Arabic question
Hi, Ramallite, as an Arabic speaker, I was wondering if you could help me with this. In the article about Fahd of Saudi Arabia, his name was written ending with "al-Saud". It was my understanding that the "al" there was not the definite article, but rather the word meaning "house of", and thus his name should have been written ending with "Al Saud". I changed it, and then I realized that: (a) Wikipedia is full of "al-Saud" occurrences, and (b) I don't really know Arabic. Would you happen to know the correct transliteration? Cheers. --Doron23:26, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, yes, I know the Arabic script and speak a little Arabic, and the difference in the alif was what cought my eye in the first place, it was the transliteration that I wasn't sure about. From your reply I understand that I can go on and change all occurrences in Wikipedia, right?--Doron08:05, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good question
I'm not sure what the best approach is. I'm am the moment trying to work out how best to deal with some particularly bad POV editing and original research on Arab citizens of Israel (a persistently problem-prone article), and find myself equally at a loss. The easiest option is to leave them to it, not sure whether that is the best option or not (I mean, obviously it is for you and me, but should we take a more altruistic perspective, and is there any point?).
Specifically with regard to that material in the Bethlehem article, I think one consideration is whether the particular topic is being given undue weight in the article. Arguably it is. One problem with taking it out is that you would be criticised for "removing sourced material", a criticism which appears to be untrumpable however biased the material (or even within certain bounds the sources) are. Palmiro | Talk19:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
