Dorpwnz

October 2013

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Palestinian people. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. AsceticRosé 17:06, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

What are you talking about? i gave some sources from inside of the palestnian leadership denying the existence of the palestian people,no spam,no removel of information.

please be more clear

dor --Dorpwnz (talk) 17:10, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

That article and all content related to the Arab-Israeli conflict broadly construed is covered by WP:1RR. See the WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES section at the top of article's talk page. You broke the 1RR restriction. Editors who break that rule are reported and usually blocked, so if you are planning to continue editing in the topic area, you shouldn't do that again. Sean.hoyland - talk 17:30, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

You are wrong.

i have had my information deleted by both Malik Shahbazz and asceticrose. more than one reversion by two people. they should not do this. take care --Dorpwnz (talk) 18:15, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Please read WP:1RR. The rule applies to people on an individual basis. Two people making 1 revert each is not a violation. One person making 2 reverts is a violation. Sean.hoyland - talk 18:27, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

You really have no better reason for not letting me add information,right? --Dorpwnz (talk) 22:00, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

This isn't about me. You need to comply with Wikipedia's rules and figure the content out with the other editors who reverted you by using the discussion page of the article. Sean.hoyland - talk 06:55, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

I tried, i saw no response. --Dorpwnz (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

I guess you mean this. To clarify, I meant Talk:Palestinian_people is where you need to discuss it. Also your statement "AsceticRose,Malik shabazz and sean.hoyland" should say "AsceticRose, Malik shabazz and Dan Murphy". Sean.hoyland - talk 17:07, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

I will make one comment on your content, specifically "palestinian representative such as Walid Shoebat". Walid Shoebat is not a "palestinian representative" by any stretch of the imagination so I have no idea where that comes from. Also, there is absolutely no chance whatsoever, that any article in Wikipedia will ever refer to Shoebat as "a former PLO member" using the narrative voice of the encyclopedia as a statement of fact. That is never going to happen. Sean.hoyland - talk 18:04, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

PLO > today's Palestnian Authority - do your own thinking...

and he is,why do you demonize him ?,beacuse 1 in millions does the opposite of what their idealogy /leaders tell to do ? what do you know about palestinian nationalism aswell?

there was no calling for a palestinian authority before 67. even Yasser arafat wanted it as a part of jordan.why are the facts so terrible? i mean,if you want to be objective ,dont make things look like a solid fact ,but add other quoates/information from their own leaders /history to balance the information,from what i see the "palestinian people" aritcle is based upon point of views,while there are some who would suggest that there are still questions about who is a palestinians,and they are found among palestinians themsevles. especially with the part telling they are descended from the plhistines (hebrew word for invader(פולש) which came from crete. it's not a valid statement ,because there are no archeological findings or cultural findings to support this statement,and because this was a part of a political campaign. the cnaanite palestinain myth was supported by arafat during the 90's,and this is why you can see them using symboles of the cnaanite culture as a part of their culture (it was morrocan,egyptian,syrian,lebanese combined before due to immigration)

Do you know must of todays palestinain villages have the names of older talmudic jewish settlements? how is that ? i mean,denying the roots of other nation while stenghtening the principles of an invented one (atleast from what i see) is not something i get to see alot... what do you think about the concept?

so if you leave walid shoebat's part ,what is the problem with the mentioning of mark twain(history,it's critical) or the saying of Azmi Bishara? azmi bishara represents palestinains in the knesset,just like Hanin Zouabi. i dont think it's a good idea to make an article about something their own people do not support. i gave evidence,including the video. if the information you provide is not valid at all ,so why even create a wikipedia article for that? oh,and by the way,im not some member of the "zionist movement" ,most of all just call ourselves israelis. so there's no need to make it sound bad. --Dorpwnz (talk) 15:38, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, it's not clear whether what you have written above is a quote from somewhere or whether you are writing your personal views. If it's a quote, you can indicate that by doing the following.

• "the quote" -who said it[url of source]

If it's your personal views, I don't really have anything to say, other than perhaps commenting on "Do you know must of todays palestinain villages have the names of older talmudic jewish settlements?". My reply to that would be, I don't care. Jews, Palestinians, Chinese, Australians, same thing, human beings. People, who happen to be alive now, claiming a historical connection to piece of a planet is not something, as a geoscientist, that interests me or that I can take very seriously to be honest, as offensive as that might sound. On the content itself, I wasn't demonizing Shoebat. Demonizing living people is not allowed here by the way (see WP:BLP). I was saying that Wikipedia will never refer to Shoebat as "a former PLO member" as a statement of fact. It's an unsubstantiated claim as the Walid Shoebat article correctly makes clear. And to describe him as a "representative" is unsourced and odd given the results of investigations into his claims by the media. On the other issues, you need to follow that up with the editors who reverted you by creating a talk page section at Talk:Palestinian_people and discussing it there. Sean.hoyland - talk 17:10, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

A good and friendly advice to Dorpwnz would be to abandon trying to edit or even thinking to edit this or related articles with such fundamentally flawed notions like there is no palestinian nation ,and you should fix the article by saying it simply because it is a no-go. You're welcome if you've something constructive. Thanks. -AsceticRosé 07:03, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

i gave it , but it was deleted...what's bad in mark twain? you make it sound like i have been doing something wrong. you ascetic just edit what you like . seriously,it's a myth,you need to consider the other factors.--Dorpwnz (talk) 07:15, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

WOW!!!! my talk was deleted by a guy Bbb23 - how can you report such things ? it's a talk page! a YOUTUBE video was deleted in a TALKPAGE in the excuse of copyrights. it's NOT OKAY. how do you report such actions? Bbb23,i warn you,"internat gangster" , do NOT delete my words. if you do this again i will have to report.

--Dorpwnz (talk) 19:12, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Watch who you're calling 'internet gangster'. And you'll "have to report"? Is that a legal threat? m.o.p 08:20, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

No Dorpwnz, what you gave was not constructive by any means. And don't pretend to be so innocent; you should understand what you are doing. A user talk-page is not a blog. It has some rules. We go by Wikipedia policies.

You are never expected to use the negative words you used above. Bbb23 is an administrator who performs important administrative and maintenance tasks, like other admins. Admins are trusted users of Wikipedia. Your edits were deleted because those deserved to be deleted. They were deleted because Wikipedia policies permitted to do so. You cannot blame other users for this, let alone administrators.

See some of the policies: Five pillars of Wikipedia, neutral point of view, no original research , providing reliable sources, community consensus, assuming good faith, What Wikipedia is not, Civility.

Remember that threats don't work here. It is policies that work. Persistent ignorance to listen to others and failure to comply with Wikipedia policies will lead to your being blocked. -AsceticRosé 12:58, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Okay,so where can i put the video with Azmi already?--Dorpwnz (talk) 13:10, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your inquiry. As Bbb23 already told you this is a WP:LINKVIO and can't be cited anywhere, probably you can not use it anywhere. Please note that a YouTube video is not used as a source of information, or as a support for your claim. Please read reliable source policy which lists the sources that can be used as reliable sources. Besides, Wikipedia maintains strict copyright policy. So, any item, or a LINK to a web-page that violates copyright is deleted. For your case, please SEE WP:LINKVIO. Thanks. -AsceticRosé 15:34, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

This should be the last comment on the item you are trying to add (be sure it will not be added as it is a false claim). -AsceticRosé 15:40, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Did you check the video?--Dorpwnz (talk) 21:26, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Again,did you check the video ? it serves as another valid perspective in the defenition of the word palestinians.

i'd like to add to the article the names of palestinian families which could trace their origin back to where they came from . here's the list : , "Al masri (egyptian,very popular) , Altaqrity(iraqi), Halabi(syrian), Al-lubnani (lebanese), Alkurd (kurdish)), Otman,Turk (Turkish) Alhijazi (arabian). almughrabi (maghreb region), aljazir (algerian) Alarj (morcocan, Abid(brought by ottomans form sudan as slaves) bosnians (al-boshnak),checheyn)al-chichany)

Rifat Turk Rifaat_Turk is a living example for a person of turkish origin classified as palestinian (israeli arab)

i wait for your response --Dorpwnz (talk) 10:16, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring

Please be more clear. i have had my article edited by Both ArcticRose and Malik Shabazz without any explaination while i am giving valid information about the actual case. i really have no interest in edit warring /internet gangsters or whatever, i just want to provide valid information without getting it deleted with NO EXPLAINATION ATTACHED!

--Dorpwnz (talk) 18:05, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Multiple editors evidently do not agree with your assessment that it is valid information. Please read WP:BRD. Sean.hoyland - talk 18:20, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Arab-Israeli sanctions notification

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, satisfy any standard of behavior, or follow any normal editorial process. If you inappropriately edit pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the "Final decision" section of the decision page.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice is given by an uninvolved administrator and will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system.

--Bbb23 (talk) 18:48, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh I see

Thanks for the clarification. I am disappointed then.

It seems you have such strong convictions against the palestinian identity, but in fact you haven't ever questioned whether the Jewish ethnic identity is on any more solid ground. "Assumed" knowledge is a dangerous thing - it leads to all kinds of fights (and wars).

I now understand your misplaced passion for this topic.

Perhaps some facts will help calm you down.

• All national identities are manufactured, and are no more than 250 years old
• All national histories are romantic stories created in the 19th and early 20th centuries (see Historiography and nationalism)
• Palestinian nationalism and identity as we know it today is about a century old
• Jewish nationalism and identity as we know it today is about a century and a half old
• Palestinian nationalism developed as a reaction to Zionism
• Zionism developed as a reaction to the development of Russian and German nationalism
• Russian and German nationalism developed as a reaction to French (Napoleonic) nationalism

So there really is no conspiracy. No nationalism is any better or worse than any other.

So stop hating and open your eyes, ears and mind.

Oncenawhile (talk) 23:18, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

this is simple : in the view of the arabs in the palestinian authority ,palesine (land of israel) should be freed ,the whole map is covered in their flag in their logos , you/others who let themselves in are supporting it . that means - you support replacing the jewish community in the state of israel by an arab community. --Dorpwnz (talk) 04:07, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

No, it is not simple. You just are not aware of what you don't know. Oncenawhile (talk) 08:08, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Please tell me of what i dont know? about the words above^ --Dorpwnz (talk) 12:31, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Please stop using talk pages such as Talk:Israeli-occupied territories for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article; not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:20, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

it is purely related to the subjects in the text. --Dorpwnz (talk) 12:29, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Deletion

If you are going to remove referenced material from protected articles, then the least that you can do is leave an edit summary to explain your reason. Amandajm (talk) 15:03, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

November 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use talk pages for inappropriate discussions, as you did at Talk:Israel. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 00:28, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Dorpwnz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

KamelTebaast 03:59, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:33, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

December 2023

Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Nakba denial for general discussion of this or other topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See the talk page guidelines for more information. Thank you. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:34, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

The author of the comment is basing his assumption on unreliable content and i respond accordingly. Dorpwnz (talk) 18:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Per WP:ECR you must have 500 edits to participate in discussions concerning the Palestine/Israel conflict. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:39, 27 December 2023 (UTC)