User:Ravpapa/Archive

H.F. Redlich

I have no idea. Redlich's analysis of Berg's Lyric Suite was cited by George Perle and that is all I know about him or her. Hyacinth 00:32, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I like bluelinks

Hi, I put a link to The Help Desk on your Userpage. Now your sig is a bluelink instead of a redlink; I hope you don't mind :) --Doc Tropics 05:54, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ravpapa, I hope that the link helped, but I know that there is so much material to absorb it can be quite daunting. If you have any questions I'll be happy to try to answer them, and my advice is always worth what you pay for it :) Just send me a "Message in a bottle" by clicking on that part of my sig. I gave a minor tweak to your Userpage to bluelink Music of Israel, I'm just a little OCD that way. I find a bit of gentle irony in the fact that you named yourself after a 'troublemaker' but you make such good contributions here...of course, Socrates was regarded as a bit of a troublemaker too. Keep up the good work, and have fun. --Doc Tropics ^{Message in a bottle} 16:24, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

El Al FAC

Thanks for your comments. I have always found it harder to pass Israel related articles at FA level so I guess it is very possible that these comments stem from this. A large number of editors had no problems with the prose up to this point so it seems strange that he is so outraged. I doubt that he will ever move over to support the article, to be honest, although addressing some of those comments will still help to improve the article. Thanks. --08:24, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Just saw the draft - looks very good - I'd put in a few dates and more wikilinks and then go ahead and change it - be sure to put a response to the comment on the FAC page. Thanks --Flymeoutofhere 14:08, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Original version

I saw you created an article called original version, which seems to just be a few comments from a talk page somewhere, so I've nominated it for speedy deletion. Hope this is OK - presume that the article creation was a mistake. Cordless Larry 14:20, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I see you asked for assistance in deleting the page. You can ask for deletion directly by adding {{db-author}} to the top of the page to be deleted. This alerts an Admin that the page's author wants it deleted (you might also include your rationale in the edit summary). As long as you're the primary contributor to the page, it will usually be deleted without further discussion. Jim Dunning | talk 14:27, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Merging articles for Raelism

I took your advice, despite the fact I disagreed with it. There is new article titled Raëlianism, which I believe merges these aspects. However, this raises new questions of NPOV. I want your opinion whether you think the merged version is better than the separate version. However, right now it is 97 kb. It's going to be large if it is going to be merged. There's just no way around it without deleting massive amounts of content.◙◙◙ I M Kmarinas86 U O 2¢ ◙◙◙ 20:15, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

What the hell? The page I took hours to arrange was redirected to Raelism because it was a content fork. But apparently, you won't pass an article about the Raelian Church for GA because it does not include everything. The Raelianism article would include everything you asked for, but its treated as a content fork by other members. And please, comprehensiveness is not GA criteria. I shouldn't have to create what some people see as a overly long article, to - what - pass it for GA? Someone has already admitted that the Raelianism article is overly long. That article wouldn't pass GA even if GA criteria were applied. I'm sticking with the original articles this time, and I'm not coming back to making the bigger article. Have a nice day :).◙◙◙ I M Kmarinas86 U O 2¢ ◙◙◙ 18:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Gal On Article

Thank you for your kind words. To be honest, I have no idea how far Gal On is from the sea. I got that figure from their website, so I assume it is valid. I know that on a clear day you can see Ashdod from Gal On. If you think that the figure is inaccurate, go ahead and change it. By the way, I absolutely love your username. I went to a Yeshiva when I was a kid and I would laugh everytime I saw Rav Papa's name. Cheers. Notecardforfree 17:25, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Palestinian Arabs versus Palestinian People

I need your help. As you're aware I renamed the page to "Palestinian Arabs" to remove an injustice. Those that are interested in keeping that POV reverted my change. I want to do this the correct way and I need your help. Thank you. Itzse 18:02, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Music of Israel

Apparently it was from the Commons, and was deleted because a source was not given (see [1]). Uploading it again with the proper source and permissions should solve the problem. CloudNine 10:01, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your post to my talk page. I appreciate it, because I went through some puzzlement, too, until I decided to focus my response on just one aspect of Gila's comments. Maybe her approach was biased by the way she was referred to this article. --rich<Rich Janis 08:59, 15 July 2007 (UTC)>

Interesting that you noticed that Gilabrand is a woman. I had assumed from the style of the post that she was a man, but a visit to her user page confirmed your observation. --Ravpapa 05:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad you found the additions interesting. I'm OCD about music from this part of the world. I'd like to find recordings of this sub-genre. Cheers, Dogru144 15:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hey, thanks for the compliments about the article on Daniel Epstein. I was going through my Dad's record collection some time ago and came across the Ormandy/PhilOrch/Epstein interpretation of the Yellow River Piano Concerto and thoroughly enjoyed its "big tunes" and the bravura and warmth of the performance. Please say hello to your brother for me, even though I haven't had the chance, so far, to know or see him. And keep up the good work, like your efforts on Music of Israel and Ignaz Schuppanzigh. Defrosted 04:23, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Salaam/Shalom

Hi Ravpapa. Thanks for your note about the link controversy at Palestinian people. I also wanted to say that I have encountered your comments in talk pages elsewhere and wanted to compliment you on your fair and friendly approach to people whose ideas you do and do not share. It's very refreshing to encounter such an open-spirit. I wish we had more people like you working in "battleground" areas, though I understand why such people prefer to stay far away. Anyway, thanks again. Tiamut 15:12, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Music of Iraq and Israel

I just got your note and I'll check the site. Often I'm a stickler for documentation; but in this case I was remiss in providing it. I got all of the information from the Internet. Possibly a couple of items relied on information from sites that were record-selling outfits. I hope that these sites don't produce controversy (re the anti-commercialization credo). Happy New Year, Dogru144 11:53, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Nice work too, on your part. Thanks for letting me know that Salima Pasha actually did not immigrate to Iarael. I thought that keeping mention of her is practical, as it would give readers a view of the Jewish role in Iraqi music, for those readers that actually wouldn't follow the cross-reference to Music of Iraq article. I split the references that had been combined, to give each of them theie own reference, since this is the wikipedia practice. Dogru144 22:07, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Palestinian people

Hi. I don't you and hope you don't mind my walking in unannounced. Anyway, somehow I suspect that your recent comment, for Itzse to start a POV fork, was tongue-in-cheek. Perhaps it's your way of getting Itzse to grok that his approach is untenable. But it also may come across as ridiculing him. However, I think it would be more appropriate to just explain to him, even at the risk of repetition, what his responsibilities are as an editor, acting in good faith, in terms of WP:RS, WP:Undue, etc. Accordingly, if you don't mind my saying so, it might be better to simply <snip> your comment as distracting. Take care. HG | Talk 20:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it wasn't tongue in cheek - it was quite serious. Perhaps unWikian, as I pointed out, but serious nonetheless.

When I made this suggestion, I was thinking primarily of Wikipedian readers. I see many articles that are simply bad, because editors of dramatically different POVs make a mishmash trying to come up with a version that is acceptable to both sides. I think that in many cases readers would be much better served if, instead of reading one obfuscated version presuming to be NPOV, they could read two perfectly clear versions, each representing an explicit POV. Like advocacy journalism, only advocacy encyclopedianism.

In the case at hand, my personal opinion is that the article on the Palestinian Nation is a good one, and pretty balanced. But Itze's POV, noxious though it is to me, is one that is not a fringe opinion in many circles. Moreover, it is an opinion that has been supported by scholarship for a number of years. If Itze is serious, he could certainly write a well-documented article about Palestinian Arabs which, while presenting both sides of the debate, would leave the reader with the clear impression that there is no Palestinian nation.

I worked as a journalist (Associated Press foreign correspondent) for 10 years, and in that time I learned that neutrality is a myth. When writing on controversial subjects, a writer better serves his readers by making his point of view explicit, and trying his best to be fair to all sides.

I allow myself to make this suggestion because the Wikipedia is the world's most successful experiment in pluralism. The Wikipedia is not a mere encyclopedia in the way that EB or Worldbook is. The range of topics and the way that Wikipedians approach them is in many cases fundamentally different. It is a place where minds are open, discussion is free, and experiments like this are possible.

Having said all that, I certainly don't plan to pursue this idea beyond the single post that I made. I am much more interested in writing my own little pieces about things so esoteric that no one would ever dream of arguing about them (Ignaz Schuppanzigh and Walter Willson Cobbett for example) rather than engaging in Wikipedian politics. --Ravpapa 05:15, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ravpapa - your suggestion does has merit, but it's long been rejected here, for reasons I think are good, and I hope I can explain to you. If we were to allow POV forks of this kind, then there is no limit to where it would lead. What if there is a 3rd point of view, written up in a credible (or at least readable) fashion with some "new" ideas that other editors didn't really want in the first 2 articles? We'd soon have 15 articles, all slightly different, none of them getting the kind of intense collaborative scrutiny and input we believe articles should get. The door would be open to outright propaganda.

Actually, the problem with this particular article is much simpler. The encyclopedia should reject outright the input of editors who are not "sympathetic" to small nations/ethnicities (particularily one that everyone agrees is suffering terribly). If we gloss over some of their real faults, so be it, readers (anywhere in this topic) are not going to treat our work as definitive in any case.

Even if you disagree with me on the above, there is one thing on which I'm sure you'll agree, the whole project needs to tighten up substantially on those who preach racist abuse and lies. I've just noticed an article full of quotes from a "historian" who has written "Until the Arab armies invaded Israel on the very day of its birth, May 15, 1948, no quarter whatsoever had ever been given to a Jew who fell into Arab hands." It should be very obvious that this is outrageously objectionable on two distinct grounds, and this person should never, ever be quoted in our articles! PalestineRemembered 08:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, Ravpapa, thanks for your response. It's a pleasure to meet you here. I guess you unintentionally asked a Solomonic question. (Our colleague Itzse's reply does not reflect on him favorably.) Anyway, I believe there is Wikipedia spin-off that allows/encourages POV forks, can't recall name off-hand. But you did say "When writing on controversial subjects, a writer better serves his readers by making his point of view explicit, and trying his best to be fair to all sides." Wikipedia is certainly open to showcasing multiple viewpoints, trying to be fair to all sides, and it applies certain guidelines, e.g. how to treat fringe theories, what to choose as the main view on a topic (if any), how to navigate these disputes, etc. I hope you find many opportunities to share your skills and knowledge with Wikipedians, and that you avoid whatever level of contentiousness would bring you frustration here. Kol tuv and shanah tovah, HG | Talk 09:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Copyright of music

{{helpme}}

I want to include a song by Israeli singer Yoram Gaon in an article on Music of Israel. The song is published on Yoram Gaon's website, in its entirety but with reduced quality. It is freely available for download from that site.

When an artist publishes his song on his own website, does including it in a Wikipedia article constitute fair use (even though the author/publisher has not explicitly granted license in text on the website)?

Thank you for your guidance. --Ravpapa 12:44, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Later: Never mind, I think I found the answer. I have cut the sample to less than 30 seconds, so it meets Wikipedia standards for Fair Use. --Ravpapa 13:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I've removed/"nowiki'd" the template, seeing as your question has been answered (by yourself); I hope you don't mind. If you have any other queries, feel free to re-add it ({{helpme}}). See you around. :) Qwerty (talk) 13:37, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:LaKahatEtYadiBeYadeh.ogg

Thanks for uploading Image:LaKahatEtYadiBeYadeh.ogg. 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 04:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:PashutVeAmiti.ogg

Thanks for uploading Image:PashutVeAmiti.ogg. 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 05:07, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Very good stuff

Thanks for alerting me to those. I will try to incorporate material into the article on Palestinian music (which is in bad need of an overhaul) soon. For now, I will definitely link to the page on music in Israel. Good work! Tiamut 21:21, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Music Conservatory

Hi Ravpapa, I noticed in your "My Drafts" secion, you mention that in 2003 Palestinians created the first music conservatory in Ramallah. This is not true. The Edward Said National Conservatory of Music (previously National Conservatory of Music) was established in Ramallah in 1993. (http://ncm.birzeit.edu/new/page.php?page=background) --Fjmustak 21:48, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

help me

I need to delete Image:MaHaDawin.ogg, which I uploaded under fair use to illustrate a point in Music of Israel. However, I later found a better example, so this image is now orphaned and must be deleted. However, I find no delete function anywhere on the page.

Thanks, --Ravpapa 14:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I've requested its deletion RyanLupin (^talk/_contribs) 14:55, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Nice Work--Can You Fix Something Else Please

Just skimmed your article on Israeli Music, Ravpapa. Very nice work, well done. I may have some ideas about your choice of samples and the organization of the article after I read it more carefully, but it looks pretty complete, well rounded,and objective so far.

Anyways, until then: I found your article as a link from the "Israel" entry in an article called "Roots Revival Music". The entry is very misleading, as it seems to imply that there is no such thing as "Israeli Folk Music", which is obviously not true in every sense. Could you have a look? You could be the one to fix that, you seem to be articulate and knowlegable enough.

Thanks

--Sukkoth 10:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Dear Sukkoth,

I am guessing you are new to Wikipedia as you don't yet have a user page. Well, now you have a talk page at least.

Anyway, thanks for pointing out that article on Roots revival. I revised the section on Israeli music, as per your suggestion.

Regards,

--Ravpapa 13:47, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Since you asked, I've been dabbling in Wiki edits for about a year. I never put up a user page as I have been too busy. Opposite to you I touch on many topics--the mess is all over the place, trust me on that.

When I wrote to you the other day, I also composed a default entry of my own (in case unknown you didn't respond), but I didn't post it, as it was too long, and possibly not accurate, and possibly directed to the point at hand, and hoped this "Ravpapa" could do better. For the record tho, just for the heck of it, look at my try, does this look like correct information?

From around the beginning of the 20th century, Zionist immigrants to Palestine developed a kind of song based on poetry set to composed music, influenced foremost by Russian, but also by Yiddish, Yemeni, and other folk music. Accompaniments included piano, recorder flute, guitar, accordion, and tarbuka. The music was and is “folk” in that people tend to learn it “live”, in that it often has a “ballad-like” sound, and that it has a distinct sound characteristic of a specific culture. This is what is generally understood by the term “Israeli Folk Music” (Shirei ‘Am Yisra’eliim). However, it was unlike traditional folk music in being composed by named writers, in being of relatively recent origin and in often being studio-recorded at creation. The genre culminated in the “Shirei Ro‘im” (“Shepherds’ Songs”) style of the late 50s/ 60s, with commercial duos such as The Duda’im, The Parvarim, and Ran and Nama. From the 60s it was eclipsed in society by the rise of Muzika Mizrahit and global/ American pop styles. It has since receded into orchestrated, jingle-like presentations, but also continues to be heard at folk dances, at public sing-alongs, on outdoor excursions, etc. Thus Israeli “Folk” music has had some elements of “Revival” from its beginnings.

Since the 70s, starting with the group Ha-Breirah Ha-Tiv‘it, a niche ethnic fusion genre has developed, influenced by the above folk genre, with further doses of Yiddish, Ladino, as well as Morrocan, Palestinian, Indian, Ethiopian, Jazz, and Progressive influences. Other exponents include Bustan Avraham and the Idan Reichal Project.

Some singer-songwriters, such as the late Me’ir Ariel, and Ehud Banai have been influenced by Israeli or world folk music.::

--Sukkoth 19:21, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I think it's pretty much right. The only questionable factoid is what you say about shirei ro'im. The Shirei Ro'im date back to the 1920's - the greatest proponent of the style was Matityahu Shelem, who was, in fact, a shepherd by trade.

But what is more important is that, truth be told, almost all "traditional" folk music is written by named writers. Who wrote America's folk songs? Stephen Foster. And who wrote the Roots revival folk songs? Woody Guthrie. For every old song that Woody Guthrie dug up and revived, he wrote another original one in the same style. The idea that folk music is written by the folk is pretty much a bobi meise.

So, in that sense, Israeli folk music has nothing to be ashamed of. --Ravpapa 20:14, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks then. But what would you call the sub-genre of Shirei Eretz Yisraeli formerly and informally called "kol ha-hoo-ha ha-zeh"? I think you know the style I mean, "SEY" would be too inclusive. Do Shirei Ro'im have to be about sheep and goats, or is it a whole style?

As for the bobi meise, you have a point, virtually all people who wrote songs had, at some point, names, but I think you are overstating the case a bit. Yes, She Walks These Hills in a Long Black Veil goes back in the hidden mists of history all the way back to---1959. But who wrote The Cuckoo She's a Pretty Bird with it's gazillion "floating verses"? Actually, it's ALL written by the "Folk", as Louis Armstrong said, it's never written by horses.

And yes I agree Israeli folk music has nothing to be ashamed of, whenever or however it was created, not by a long shot. Maybe some people still sport that sophisticated pose about "It's not authentic etc etc" but to me that (the pose and the claim) is of minor social interest only.

--Sukkoth 19:29, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

are admins evil?

Yes, Ravpapa. Sociopath is a strong term, but in my extensive scans and observations of Wikipedians, I have indeed noticed sociopathy. I tried hard in this last "rant" to be clear that only *perhaps* this is the case, and where that lies is [unidentifiable]. Certainly not all editors are sociopaths. And only a few at best. If my statement was construed that way, I amend it here. Yes, it is a huge ball of energy barreling towards who-knows-where, and it is out of control, and there is fear, but where there is fear, there are predators. And predators are excellent at disguising themselves. How many there are, and whom, is "perhaps unidentifiable." But the markings are there. These thoughts are incomplete. I tried to summarize my thoughts in shorter form. I think that adding information should be easier and encouraged more, while removing information should be much more difficult, because the vandals like to remove, not add. I don't have a god's eye on Wikipedia, so I can only conceptualize upon what I notice, the trends that become apparent. I am always open to suggestion. I want the project (process) to proceed, and succeed. I think this is the point in the turns of the project where a dose of METACOGNITION would do a body good. This is my broader intent. So I am also trying to provoke questioning and insight, as perhaps Socrates would have, were he to have a computer with a Wikipedia. --User:Kreepy krawly

Thank you

Thank you for your comments from the RFC- please see my reply in the article talk page (about the Mufti) Zeq 12:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

How do I upload a new version of an existing photo?

{{helpme}}

I want to upload a retouched version of a photo that already exists on the Wikipedia. But when I go to Upload File, it looks as though I am creating a completely new file.

Before I do damage, I would like to know how uploading updates works. I don't want to overwrite the existing version, just create a new version. tnx, --Ravpapa 17:45, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

If you go to the image's description page, you should find below the file history a light blue link that says "Upload a new version of this file". The form you'll be brought to will look exactly like the standard upload form, however as long as the "Destination filename" matches an existing image, you'll be replacing that image with the one you are uploading. If the licensing is the same, you can leave licensing field alone, but make sure to leave a short description of what you've done in the summary section. For more information, you can go to Help:Images. Hope this helps! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:51, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Just back

Just got back from an unannounced Wikibreak. Thanks for the kind words on Sullivan - talk tomorrow. Adam Cuerden ^talk 00:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

My comments on GA review of Music of Israel

In light of this review, I think it would be preferable to pass on GA status, rather than make most of the changes recommended. I feel that almost all the changes requested would make the article worse rather than better, so I recommend leaving it as it is. Of course, I am not the only editor here, so if others want to pursue this, they are welcome. My comments on the review are included inline below. --Ravpapa 08:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

This article needs a lot of work, one of the reasons is that it is long so it will take longer to fix up, but I am holding for a while to see what happens, since it is mainly polish, rather than a lack of content and building. It will need a lot of work though.

• The External links section has commentary in it, which is inappropriate

The commentary is intended to be useful to readers. Rather than forcing the reader to follow each link to find out what is there, we tell them, so if it is not of interest, we save them the trouble. For example, saying that the Israel Music Institute is a union of composers does not seem to me inappropriate. If Wikipedia style dictates that no comment be included, I prefer to violate the style and help the reader.

• Further reading also has comments, recommending certain stuff, which is not ideal, and should be bulleted

See my comment above.

• References should be bulleted but are not formatted consistently. Using the template is an easy way to fix all this. Don’t put comments “available online her” , “click here”, the url field in the template will do the thing.

The reason I wrote "available online here" is because including the entire link in the text caused the line to be so long that it spilled into the next column and became unreadable, or required the reader to scroll left and right to read it. Since no information is removed (the reader can always follow the link or look at it in edit mode), and it makes the text more readable, it seemed the logical thing to do. Again, if this is a violation of Wiki style, I prefer not to follow the style.

• Reference inlines are not consistent. The usage of p and pp styles need to be consistent whatever you use

I assume this is referring to the fact that p sometimes has a period and sometimes not. Yes, this is inconsistent. I will fix it.

• Book pages also need to be quoted, not just “Sela (2007)” and so forth. In some places there is just a weblink without the author, date, publisher details and so forth.

It seems odd to include a page number of a reference which is only one page long, as in the case of the Sela reference. Had you looked in the references, you would have seen that. In all cases where the quote is from a multipage document, the page number is included.

• A few refs are inappropriate. One is another WP article.

I didn't see any references to other WP articles. There is one footnote referring to another section of this article - it is a case where a single sentence refers to a subject discussed at length in another part of the article.

• See also section is not really the place to describing stuff, and should not be used for telling us about he wikipedia

Again, I feel the see also section is an aid to readers. If I were not to refer readers to the Hebrew Wikipedia, it is highly likely that most readers would never know about this resource. There are also articles about Israeli musicians in the English Wikipedia - I do not refer readers to those because it is fair to assume that they will find those themselves. So, again, if this is a violation of Wikipedia style, I prefer to leave it in and pass on GA status.

• Inline refs should be directly afted the punctuation: “ajgnakjadg.[15]”

Okay, if you say so. That is something I have no objection to fixing.

• Lead. Some of the short paras should be integrated. “Israeli composers in the classical tradition have their works performed often by leading orchestras worldwide.” Does not appear to be in the main body.

You are right about Israeli composers. I will add some stuff about international performances of Israeli composers. As for integrating short paras, I have noticed that there is a penchant for long paragraphs in the Wikipedia. I don't understand why. I always felt that a paragraph should deal with a single topic. If there were two separate topics, they should be in separate paragraphs, even if the paragraphs are relatively short. Combining different topics in a single paragraph only makes reading harder, not easier.

• Many invalid fair use images, like Ofra Haza. A CD has been scanned simply to show us how the person looks. CDs are suppposed to only be used when we discuss the cover art on the CD and so forth. There are a few of these

I really don't know what to say about this. It is true that the image of Ofra Haza is there to show readers what Ofra Haza looks like. That is the same reason the image appears in the article about her. There is no specific discussion of Ofra Haza's appearance, neither here or in the article specifically about her. Does that mean the the use of the image in the Ofra Haza article is also not fair use? If this is the case, I think the vast majority of fair use images in the Wikipedia will have to go.

Actually, I read Wikipedia:Non-free content pretty carefully before I wrote this article. In my reading of that guideline, use of promotional photographs of artists is allowed when the article specifically discusses those artists. As I understand it, the discussion does not have to be about the photograph of the artist, but about the artist his or herself. And that is the case here.

• Many sections are unreferenced, e.g. “Arabic music” section

There are 11 footnotes in the Arabic music section, including references to one book on the subject, and numerous periodicals. What kind of reference are you referring to?

• In many cases, a set of lyrics are cited from a song database, but it seems to stretched into analysis of the style. This may be OR.

I need specific references before I can make any comment or correction here.

• Many sections have many small paras which shoul be merged.

See my comment on combining paragraphs above.

• in the musical characteristics section, many of the parts are not sourced, or only an example is sourced, leaving open the possibility of OR. E.g., the comments about war influencing music.

Maybe you're right. Maybe listening to a lot of Israeli songs, and noticing that many of them are about war constitutes original research. Maybe I have to wait for someone else to listen to the music and notice that, and also write a scholarly article about it.

I am not being snide. I have grappled with this issue in other contexts when writing about music. For example, if you write that a piece is in sonata-allegro form, is that original research? If you write that almost all the Haydn quartets are in major keys, is that original research? (In fact, only six of the 88 quartets are in minor keys.) It is my own opinion that an informed listener describing what he hears is not doing original research.

In the case in hand, I don't think there is anyone familiar with Israeli music who would dispute the statement that war has been an influence. Moreover, there is an entire section on the subject in the article (Music and the Military) which is extensively footnoted.

• Peacock phrases, e.g. “The Israel Philharmonic Orchestra has been a leading force in Israeli music and culture. It has debuted many works by Israeli composers, and has helped launch the careers of many Israeli musicians.” Concrete examples need in addition to general rhetoric

Okay. I will add examples. Good comment.

• Music and the military para, seems to have personal commentary in the first paragraph, since the only ref is to a lyrics page, it seems that conclusions have been drawn from checking out the songs. The French national anthem is “La Marseillaise” and it is POV to describe the French and US anthems as glorifying warfare.

You are right about the second paragraph. I will add the footnote (it is op cit - attributable to the same source as the lead, but that is not explicit) As for saying that the US and French anthems glorify war, I suppose in a sense it is POV. "Come, children of the Fatherland, the day of glory is at hand" "What so proudly we hailed... bombs bursting in air.. our flag was still there..." These seem to me pretty obvious glorifications of war to me, but maybe others see it differently. I will change it.

• Many paragraphs need to be scanned for original research and peacock terms

Hard to fix things that you don't know where they are.

• It’s the Eurovision Song Contest, not festival. Also, you might want to note that Israel hosted the ESC after winning it, per the rules. Secondly, this brings the topic of music censorship/control, which does not seem to be discussed, e.g., in 2000 the Israeli Broadcastin gAuthority disendorsed the song Samyeakh by Ping Pong because of flying the Syrian flag and other stuff they did.

I don't know where you get your information. Your link to Ping Pong goes to Table tennis. The song Sameakh by the group Ping Pong was Israel's nomination for the Eurovision contest in 2000. It was never "disendorsed" by the Israel Broadcasting Authority, though there were those who took exception to the group's appearance with the Israeli and Syrian flags on stage. The group took 22nd place in the contest. You can read all about it in the article on Israel's entries in Eurovision, in the Hebrew-language Wikipedia (but I guess I shouldn't be referring to that).

• The lack of sourcing is more pronounced in the late part of the article

There are 42 footnotes in the first part of the article. There are 59 in the second part. I'm afraid you'll have to be more specific if you want something fixed.

• Listy sections need to be smoothed and joined together to push thematice concept.

I agree. I dislike listy sections.

• Some pov terms like “superstar” and “colourful character” without source

Agree. Will remove or attribute.

In conclusion, I am not necessarily disagreeing with your determination that the article does not meet Wiki style guidelines in many cases. I simply think that the article is better off as it is. --Ravpapa 08:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Regards, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:16, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Ravpapa, do you think it worthwhile to request a reassessment of the review, based on Blnguyen's non-responsiveness to our questions? Also, I wonder at your decision to put your "pass on GA status" comments here on your talk page, instead of on the article's talk page, where it seems most likely to be seen by other editors. For example, I came here only to ask you about the reassessment. Rich Janis (talk) 00:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:YehuditRavitz.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:YehuditRavitz.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. Ricky81682 (talk) 03:51, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For the excellent work you did on the Israeli music article and your generally kind and calm demeanor. Tiamut 11:21, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I love you too my brother (or sister, as the case may be). Tiamut 15:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't see a [robelm with the tag

yes tag no tag - that is not so critical. Zeq (talk) 18:37, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

his role as a leader. his innovations in releigion. his participation in Nazi plans - all these are missing now. Just look at the sources I have listed on the now archived talk page. Zeq (talk) 21:05, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I also think his other role in the 40s (beyond the nazi coopreation mention in theMelman- Kuppres refrnce from Yad Va shem) is his role in creating anti btitish revolt in Iraq and Lebanon and later his call to kill the Jews in 1947/8. Thanks. Zeq (talk) 13:30, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Reply from User:Icairns

Reply left after your comment. Ian Cairns (talk) 18:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Argov.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Argov.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. Rettetast (talk) 14:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Husseini and 1920 riots

Shalom Ravpapa.
Thank you for the information. That helps me much and should be enough for my purpose. I didn't understand why other protagonists action was detailed in the scholars book I have but not the one of the most (un)famous of the protagonists. In more sentenced to 10 years imprisonment. Ceedjee (talk) 20:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi,

Thank you again for the info.

E. Elat (Haj Amin el Husseini, Ex Mufti of Jerusalem (Tel Aviv 1968)), Hussayni was convicted by a secret military court of violation of paragraphs 32, 57, and 63 of the Ottoman code - all of which have to do with incitement to riot. Proceedings of the hearings - which were held with Hussayni himself in absentia - were never published..

I found that Philip Mattar claims that nothing indicates that he had incited people to violence and Rashid Khalidi, in the Iron Cage, talks about "alleged" accusations...

I cannot find any reference of Elat on the internet. What is his full name ? Who is he ? Do you have his book ? Does he explain how he got "information" that were never published ?

Thank you ! Ceedjee (talk) 20:55, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

nb: could you answer me  ? Thank you ! Ceedjee (talk) 20:59, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I am unable to add my response to your French userpage because it is "semiprotegee". So I am responding here and on your English userpage, hoping that you will see the response. E Elat is Eliahu Elath, born Eliahu Epstein. He was an Israeli diplomat and historian, who also served for six years as president of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. The book was published in Hebrew. You can read a brief biography of him at http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CEFD71538F931A15755C0A966958260 Elat, like Perlman, was involved in the intelligence services of the Yishuv prior to statehood, and was consequently privy to a lot of classified information. That information is today available to scholars who want to go squirreling through the archives of the Haganah or of British intelligence. Both archives are today open for scholarly research, though the bureaucracy for getting at them is still pretty daunting. I don't see much reason to do this, since the material of interest has already been documented in books like Elat's, Pearlman's and Eliphelet's.

As for Mattar's contention, it is pretty incredulous - I think there is plenty of published documentation - reports in the newspaper Falastin, reports in the London Times and the NYT - that suggest the opposite. But in any case, Mattar's claim doesn't contradict Elat's - it simply means that in Mattar's opinion, the Mufti was framed.

Since my brief foray into the Mufti morass, I have returned all my library books on the subject, and have taken all the mufti pages off my watchlist. The article - as it currently stands and as it is clearly headed - is so full of polemic and apologetics, that it is becoming virtually unintelligible. Anyone looking for information on the Mufti is likely to read the first couple of paragraphs and then search on for more cogent sources of information. --Ravpapa (talk) 16:42, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your answer.

I found his name in I.Black and B.Morris, Israel's secret wars. Indeed !

Israeli former diplomats and officers took the habit to write historical books. I think about Zvi Elpeleg or fr:Zeev Drori but I am sure there are many others. That is intersting but embarrassing because it is hard to measure their objectivity and decide on their reliability... That is a slipping topic.

I share your mind about Mufti's article. But nearly all topics dealing with sensitive matters are in the same situation on wp:en. I don't have any solution. More, my not very good English and my wish to be as nuanced as possible prevents me to edit much in English...

(I remove the "semi-protection" on my talk page - I had problems with "IP vandaliss" in the past.)

Ceedjee (talk) 12:07, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Music of Israel

The IP in question that removed content from the article has edited Wikipedia twice without being warned. I would have followed my reversion with a formal "test" warning but the two edits occurred about an hour before my reversion. If an IP or account has vandalised a succession of pages and been properly warned (either by yourself or others) and elected not to desist, report the transgressor at WP:AIV. Hope that answers your question. Oh and excellent, comprehensively referenced article! Happy editing. SoLando (Talk) 14:16, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:LaKahatEtYadiBeYadeh.ogg)

Thanks for uploading Image:LaKahatEtYadiBeYadeh.ogg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 09:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, this was the correct action. BJ^Talk 23:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

New article

I may start a new article, but the word is used so infrequently, I think it goood to have a wikilink, even it is leads to a soft redirect. --evrik ^(talk) 14:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Argov.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Argov.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rossrs (talk) 13:32, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

My mistake, and I do apologise. Thank you for letting me know. I have removed the tags from the image page, and I see no problem with the use of the image. Rossrs (talk) 07:32, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Classical music in popular culture

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Classical music in popular culture, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Classical music in popular culture. Kleinzach (talk) 02:45, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Classical music in popular culture

An article that you have been involved in editing, Classical music in popular culture, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Classical music in popular culture. Thank you. Kleinzach (talk) 09:33, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

BCMS

Thanks for your comments. I will try to make things more clear.Nrswanson (talk) 11:37, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Brahms talk page

Hi Ravpapa. My response to your post is at my talk page. Cheers. -- JackofOz (talk) 09:53, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Argov.jpg

Your bot has identified this image as noncompliant with Wikipedia nonfree use criteria. This is the second time this has happened. It is no doubt the impression of the bot that Argov is a living artist, and that, under the circumstances, I could go and take a photo of him which would be in the public domain. This is not the case. Argov is dead. He died in 1987. Therefore, it is impossible to create a free image of him.

The image is used twice in the Wikipedia, once in Music of Israel and once in the article on Zohar Argov. The use in both cases is justified under fair use criteria, and is, in fact, essential to the material discussed in those articles.

Thank you, --Ravpapa (talk) 15:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that the image only has a fair-use rationale for its use in Zohar Argov. You also need to add one for its use in Music of Israel, or better, remove it from that article, since it doesn't seem to meet the fair-use requirements: it could be replaced by a free-licensed photo of another artist, and the use is mostly decorative rather than informative. --Carnildo (talk) 18:49, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Accessibility of the Grosse Fuge

I realize that your question about whether the Grosse Fuge less accessible than other Beethoven compositions because of its dissonance and contrapuntal complexity raises two related prior questions, namely 1) what does it really mean to say that something is accessible or not, and what are the criteria for that? 2) To whom is it accessible or not, and how is that established? Although it sounds prima facie reasonable to say that the grosse Fuge is not accessible, I don't really know if that's the case, i.e. if a survey would show that. Right now, WQXR, the main classical music station in New York, almost never plays any Beethoven string quartets -- they've only played a couple in a two-year period, so they apparently think that all Beethoven string quartets are inaccessible to their listeners. I guess I'm wondering whether accessibility is the right word to describe one's reaction to the GF. Your question to me about dissonance and contrapuntal complexity raises a bunch of other questions for me. For example, you say that Ravel's String Quartet is more dissonant than the GF. But the Ravel Quartet was written at a time when the general musical background was open to much more dissonance than at the time when the Grosse Fuge was written, and I think that enters into how one hears it, because I think that one hears music historically and that the essence of a piece of music is itself historical (Jerrold Levinson has written about this in a way that I find absolutely convincing in his book Music, Art and Metaphysics: Essays in Philosophical Aesthetics). So I think that there is such a thing as historically relative consonance and dissonance. With regard to Verklaerte Nacht, I don't think of it as being as contrapuntally complex as the Grosse Fuge, because in the GF, as in many fugues by Bach, each part is on a different time track, so the complexity of the counterpoint is amplified by the rhythmic disjointedness. Anyway, I think you raise interesting and good questions, and I agree that there is something mysterious about the Grosse Fuge that is very difficult to put into words. Perhaps we should strike the word "accessible" from the Grosse Fuge article, since clearly it's accessible to us and we don't know who it's not accessible to, and find some other way of talking about it, although the article gives good sources of people who obviously found it inaccessible. And I like what you said about music and noise. Jeremy J. Shapiro (talk) 14:06, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Youtube

Blah, go for it, I don't agree with it, but I also really don't wish to get into a protracted debate on the matter :), As long as you are attempting to use free content. I just happened to be reading that section, and saw the link to non-free content and did what I thought was best for wikipedia's core mission.

Shortly I'll be doing some analysis looking for WP:MOS and other issues from database dumps (which is why I don't wish to get into protracted debates, I'd rather be programming :) ).

Cheers! —— nixeagle 10:10, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Nixeagle. Glad you were reading the article. Hope you enjoyed it. --Ravpapa (talk) 06:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Jerusalem as capital

I doubt that in the history of the Wikipedia has so much vitriol been poured over such a small textual landscape. Because, friends, what are we talking about here? A total of three sentences:

• In the article Jerusalem, the first sentence: "Jerusalem is the capital of Israel."

• In the article Israel, the two sentences in the third paragraph: "Jerusalem is the country's capital, seat of government, and largest city. Jerusalem is not recognized as Israel's capital by any foreign government, however."

I think if we keep our eye on the target - and a mighty small target it is - it will help us all keep our tempers. --Ravpapa (talk) 05:47, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Too little, too late. As far as I'm concerned, this conversation is over. I am not going to participate in it anymore. Nish has demonstrated himself to be absolutely impossible to deal with, focusing on trivial, irrelevant minutiae that no one has contested, nitpicking with semantics and which dictionary I choose, using highfalutin language and allusions to make himself sound all-knowing, and looking down on me and Okedem due to our ages. Imad has demonstrated that all he cares about is painting Wikipedia as biased against Palestinians. Take a look at this essay and you'll see we have some textbook civil POV-pushing -- and it doesn't help that GHcool is just interested in throwing out nonsense comments to distract from the real discussion. I have been involved with one or more of these articles related to this capital issue for almost a year and a half now. There have several discussions on it, but none with so much drivel as this one. The other editors here are welcome to proceed with WP:DR, but they are going to have to do it without me. Enough has been said on this matter, now and in the past; I'm not going to continue chasing my tail and wasting my time, just to, in the end, reward the civil POV-pushers by eroding the current compromise. -- tariqabjotu 07:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

In the Israel [article] it is already there.

Correction: In the Israel article, it was already there. I had removed it; thanks for alerting me to its presence. -- tariqabjotu 12:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

What appears to be an hiatus in the Jerusalem capital flack

I am hoping that, in spite of your decision to disengage from this discussion, you were silently following the latest development. Which was that, because of the lack of larger participation in the discussion, we don't feel we have a mandate to recommend any change right now.

I hope that in the future you will participate in this discussion. Your contributions - even when crossing the border into anger - were always relevant.

I think that your characterization of Nishidani and Imad Marie as "civil POV pushers", as defined in User:Raul654/Civil POV pushing is unfair. Neither are monomaniacal in their editing, and both Nish and Imad have contributed to articles not related to the Middle East conflict: Nishidani has worked on Homer, Eugenio Curiel, Raimond Gaita, and Owen Lattimore‎. Imad Marie has worked on a number of articles about Islam and of general interest (Qur'an and science, Islam and science‎, Islamization of knowledge, Qur'an and miracles‎, and Oil shale). They are certainly not pushing "pseudoscience, crankery, conspiracy theories, and the like (PCCTL for short)".

By deligitimizing their position, you render any chance of compromise or discussion impossible. And their position is legitimate - at least, it is one that is held by a substantial portion of people of this world, and knowledgeable people at that. A little distance goes a long way.

After all, these arguments are only about words. And not very many words, at that. The more we can focus the discussion on one sentence or another, and display a little flexibility where possible, we can, perhaps, make our own contribution to a better Wikipedia, and maybe even a better Middle East. --Ravpapa (talk) 11:43, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, yes, I was silently following the discussion and saw the latest "development". As for future participation... I'm not responding to Nishidani or Imad marie anymore, at least on this matter. As I already noted, in one way or another in several different ways, I find them absolutely impossible to work with -- and thus, I won't try. At this point, I don't consider their opinions on this of any value and will continue to disregard them in the future.

You're entitled to your opinion about whether Imad and Nishidani are civil POV pushers; it certainly hasn't changed mine. I am aware of Nishidani's varied contributions (if you're trying to prove Imad has edited across many areas, you haven't succeeded), but having a narrow or broad focus doesn't make or break a civil POV pusher. There are other criteria on the list in Raul's essay, some of which I have noticed Imad and/or Nish fulfill quite nicely. Unfortunately, you only took select quotes from Raul's essay and proceeded to disprove them, even though I never argued that they were true.

Whether my delegitimization of their position makes compromise or discussion impossible is moot; as I already stated, I want to have neither with them. As far I'm concerned, this discussion is closed and has been closed for quite some time. I have yet to be presented with anything I didn't know already.

I'm trying to discern what you were thinking when you said...

And their position is legitimate - at least, it is one that is held by a substantial portion of people of this world, and knowledgeable people at that.

...but I can't quite tell. I'm not sure what position these "knowledgeable people" are holding. That Israel's capital is disputed? (Nobody said it wasn't.) That East Jerusalem is occupied territory? (I'm aware of that.) That Palestinians want East Jerusalem to be the capital of their own state? (I never disputed this.) That Jerusalem is not the capital of Israel? (This is called denialism and anyone who holds it is not in anyway "knowledgeable".) Or is it that the dispute over Israel's capital should be placed further up in the Jerusalem article on Wikipedia? Because frankly, I don't think most "knowledgeable people" would give a damn about that.

Even still, you obviously didn't troll through the archives enough, or else you would have discovered -- heck, in some of the very discussions you cited in your closing statement -- that my position on this matter used to be that something about the capital dispute should be in the first paragraph of Israel. I said that in January 2007 and I said it again in April 2007, specifically presenting a proposal that had just that. Go ahead, look. However, compelling reasons were provided against that and after a variety of opinions were presented by people who originally wanted something else, a version similar to the current introduction was put in place. The article was featured and, now this may come as a shock, people dropped it. (Oh, but, as has been said, I'm not flexible, I'm not open to compromise, I'm motivated by some nationalism, yada yada.)

Since then, I don't remember having a single discussion where someone has suggested that we eliminate the information about the dispute or move it even farther down, even though we (a) had people who advocated such positions initially and (b) at several points the article actually appeared like that. And yet, we continue to have these flare-ups every once in a while from someone who feels they have been entrusted with revealing to the entire wiki community... (drum roll...) things we already know about the Palestinian position. They claim it's all about neutrality, when, of course, we know it's not. Imad, apparently fluent in Arabic, seems willing to exhaust a month working on getting a few words inserted into the Jerusalem on account of "neutrality", but won't do anything about the Arabic Wikipedia calls an encyclopedic article. Why am I not surprised?

The optomistic statements in your final paragraph leave me laughing. If you think a discussion on Wikipedia will help fix the Middle East, you're crazy. Don't lecture me about "flexibility"; you're talking to the wrong person. I never asked for your poetic words of wisdom and I don't appreciate them now. -- tariqabjotu 16:02, 15 June 2008 (UTC)