User talk:IZAK/Archive 15

IZAK (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email)

Archive 10

←

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

→

Archive 20

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. – Ram-Man ^{(comment) (talk)}[[]] 23:38, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

• Dear Ram-Man: Thank you for all this information. I will need to give your communication some thought. Best wishes. IZAK 06:03, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• As do many others. Take as much time as you need and get back to me whenever you'd like. Update: I've updated the original comment, which contains more useful links. – Ram-Man ^{(comment) (talk)}[[]] 23:38, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

proposed policy

Hi, you recently commented on bible-verse articles, and may therefore be interested in commenting about a proposed policy covering roughly 50 specific verses:

• Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Verses of 1 Kings 4 and 5

--Victim of signature fascism 20:12, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

• Hi, thanks for letting me know about this. I have left messages for a number of editors associated with Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism letting them know about the discussion/s and I hope that they will provide some positive input in the coming days. Thanks for keeping me updated. IZAK 10:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

IZAK, thanks for alerting me to this, but this is simply beyond my ken. I do not hold by any English translations of the Bible, and I've just learned from the discussion pages that the point of view of these various translations is skewed to boot. Sorry I can't be of help here. Yoninah 17:33, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, Yoninah, thank you. IZAK 07:58, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

History of the Jews articles

IZAK, our disagreement about the Holocaust article aside (I am sure we will continue to discuss it in the Talk pages), I was wondering if I could enlist your help on some of the History of the Jews in ___ articles, especially in explicating the significance of some of these countries in the development of Jewish religious thought. Particularly lacking is this regard is the History of the Jews in Hungary but the articles on the History of the Jews in England and History of the Jews in the United States do not do justice to their Chasidic movements, past or present. Perhaps you can take a look when you get a chance and help out. --Goodoldpolonius2 07:04, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Goodold: I am not I sure if I clearly understand your (proposed) approach here. Could you please explain exactly what you mean by this phrase: "explicating the significance of some of these countries in the development of Jewish religious thought." As an example, for a start, please review the Chabad-Lubavitch, Satmar (Hasidic dynasty), and Bobov (Hasidic dynasty) articles, as they are the three largest Hasidic movements in the USA (also, Haredi Judaism in the USA can be found in Agudath Israel of America and Orthodox life in the Category:Yeshiva University or Orthodox Union, and of course there are also the non-Orthodox USA-based movements such as in Category:Conservative Judaism and Category:Reform Judaism, as examples), and then point out how and why they could be connected with "the signficance of" the United States" in "the development of Jewish religious thought" during the History of the Jews in the United States in the History of the Jews in the United States article. It's a tough job. Are you looking for information and an approach for how individual countries influenced Judaism (or is "Jewish religious thought} something else that you need to define so that we are on the same track)? Thought-provoking proposals though. Thanks. IZAK 08:19, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

redesigned template.

Please review Template talk:Jewish language#redesign. Thanks for your time. Tomer^talk 17:46, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

• Tomer: Your work is good, I don't really have anything to add. IZAK 08:02, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

How about two for the price of one? Could you take a look at Template talk:Jew#Proposed changes. Thanks! ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 11:07, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

• Humus: I have added my comments of agreement with you. IZAK 08:02, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! FYI: new cat Category:Jewish Ukrainian history. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 09:19, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Humus: Good addition. IZAK 09:22, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Draft article

Izak, further to the matter we are discussing, I have now taken the draft back into my own namespace and consolidated it into one file, here. I will do some more work on it in the light of recent reading (such as Johnon and Reuband, What We Knew: Terror, Mass Murder, and Everyday Life in Nazi Germany) and then think about posting it. Adam 02:40, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Adam: Your article is excellent and should be submitted as a more focused alternative to the present one, with some consideration for areas where they are in agreement and overlap, and bettter usage of footnotes. IZAK 08:01, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

One vote for you

Hi IZAK: Please see Spelling vote at Talk:Yitzchak Kaduri. Best wishes, Shuki 01:31, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Ok, done, that wasn't hard... IZAK 18:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

when you get a moment

Would you mind checking out Aniconism? Tomer^talk 17:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Done. Interesting. I added my (Jewish) penny's worth. IZAK 19:36, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Political assassinations of Israelis and British Mandate of Palestine Jews

Izak, I liked you list very much. Only in the case of the Yigal Amir article, I would like to move it to the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, as this is an extension of the assassination theme rather than Yigal Amir the person. Other political murders do not have a specific assassination article. I would really like you to move the chapter, as this is your creative work and brainchild. Also, there was another assassination of an MK that is too often overlooked in the press, possibly because both the victim and purpetrators where Arab Israelis (a Bedouin and Druze respectively). gidonb 13:39, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Gidon: On your last point first: I specifically point out that the cases refer to Jewish victims of assassins (the Jewish factor in it is what makes it so unique and fascinating) so it's not meant to include every last leader on Earth shot buy a nut. I can't speak for all other articles about political assassinations, I just dealt with those of Jewish leaders in or of British Palestine/Israel. On your first point, you are overlooking a major factor: Assassinations involve both an assassin and his/her victim -- the assassinated. The moment the assassin does the deed, history places him/her on a previously unimaginable "higher level" (it could be notoriety or glory, depending on the POV) that subsequently makes the killer forever "co-equal" with the victim (even failed assassinations work this way). A kind of metaphoric "death embrace" of killer/s and victim/s. That is why Wikipedia, and history, has BOTH a List of assassins and a List of assassinated people because you can't have the one without the other. Thus, as a few important examples: Sisera goes with Jael; Julias Ceaser goes with Brutus; Lincoln goes with Booth; Kennedy with Oswald; Indira Gandhi and her Sikh bodyguards; John Lennon with Chapman; and Rabin very clearly with Amir. Even though some of the cases on the list I inserted in the articles do not mention specific names, since at the time they happened, the assassins came out of the shadows and went back where they came from under cover, yet the point in all of them is that a Jewish leader was killed by his political enemies of which the assassin is often a part -- either acting on his own or on orders (not always known or clear) -- it's a hot potato, as you know. Another reason that my new little list should be on the Yigal Amir page is that the topic of Yigal Amir is still fresh, people come to look at the page and learn, and the information is important and relevant. Honestly, to be blunt, I think many people have a greater (morbid, probably) fascintion with Amir than with Rabin, and that is pretty typical for that type of person, i.e. an assassin who is alive yet. What do you think? IZAK 14:13, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Dear Izak, I think it's not a good practice to include the same content in several different articles, like you did with the section "Other controversial assassinations". I suggest that you put it in a new article and link to it. Yevgeny Kats 15:39, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Yevgeny: It's not a case of merely random "the same content in several different articles" (as you call it), but it is more a case of finding the best way to help the reader understand that certain identical events have happened before to Jewish leaders in the history of Zionism. It is perhaps closest to a Wikipedia template (but without the technical application of a template). There are different ways to link up and present related information in similar articles (or articles that deal with a common underlying subject) on Wikipedia. It can be done by a sub-heading in an actual article, or through a plain Wiki-box, or through a special template, or through "See also" on the page, or by links, or by creating new articles. None is necessarily "better" than the other. Something like "six of one and half a dozen of the other". IZAK 16:12, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Izak, I did not so much object to including this information in the Yigal Amir article as I thought the other article was the more appropriate place for it where we have a special article on the assassination. After all, I thought the article does fit into the other victims/murderers articles. In the Yitzhak Rabin case, I believe that the assassination article is meant for broader discussions. Now that you have placed it in both, I am very content with your contribution. I wish to thank you for your contribution in stopping the POV pushing on Yigal Amir. It is great to see that there are others around who think like me that Wikpedia is not meant for fostering political points of view. gidonb 17:47, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Pulpit as Hebrew

I wrote down the Japanese pulpit article, but can you teach pulpit as Hebrew? I wrote that "Pulpit is עַמּוּד ammud, and omed is Ashkenazi Hebrew" to Japanese article (ja:講壇). is this OK? --Sheynhertz_געשׁ״ך 09:00, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Sheynhertz: Could you please supply LINKS to the articles. I have no idea where to look for the article/s you mention here in order to help out. And I have mentioned this to you before, I am ignorant of the Japanese language, so why do you tell me about Japanese articles at all? Thanks. IZAK 09:35, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Hmm, ok, I just clicked on the Japanese link here. So I guess (judging by the photos and the links back to "in other languages" in the "toolbox" on the Japanese link you gave me here -- especially the ENGLISH link to Pulpit) what you are asking of me is that you want me to write something about what the "pulpit" is about in Judaism, am I correct in assuming that? And you are assuming that Ammud means "pulpit", right? The word Ammud (from the root omed -- "to stand") is usually the place in a synagogue or a yeshiva where the person leading the prayer services, or giving the sermon or Torah/Talmudic class stands (in the synagogue or yeshiva). Is that what you want to know about? IZAK 09:47, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I listened CD, the Abraham Ellstein's "Vos Iz Gevorn Fun Mayn Shtetele?" by Benzion Miller.

Wenn ich nem dermonen sich..

...

Oy wie demol(t?) iz gewen

azoy hartsik, azoy sheyn

Wenn mir fleygen geyn farbei die Schul

Un' dem Chazzons sheyne Shtimm

hot geklungen azoy frum

bei dem Omed mit groys gefil.

Then, one English website page says "עמוד omed is lectern"..:

עוֹמֵד ‘ômēdh -- I think this is oymed to Ashkenazic style

עַמּוּד ‘ammūdh -- I think ammud, or ammid to Ashkenazic

see also Jewish Encyclopedia pulpit article

--Sheynhertz_געשׁ״ך 13:40, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Sheynhertz: Thanks. I'll get back to you. IZAK 16:22, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

see also [1] (search bay dem omed), Yiddish Rhyming Words, szia. --Sheynhertz_געשׁ״ך 07:58, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Funny Yiddish expressions

Can you write any joke like "yidl mtn fidl" "single vi a yingl" "hudl mitn shrudel"? this is ja:Wikipedia:ウィキポータル/ユダヤ教/執筆依頼 about Jewish communities, we can read "fun pinsk biz minsk". --Sheynhertz_געשׁ״ך 14:13, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

• Sheynhertz: What you are talking about are not really "jokes" they are really (very?) funny expressions. Here are a few that I can think of IZAK 20:08, 8 February 2006 (UTC):
  • Eidel vi a kneidel und grob vi a chazer;
  • Er loift vi a vilde katchke;
  • Drei mir nisht a kop.

Yeshiva Gedolah

I am sorry, but the Yeshiva Gedolah is not a Chabad Yeshiva network. It has nothing to do with chabad except in Sydney. ems 14:58, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Could you please move the page back, I tired but failed. ems 15:03, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Who knows what is going on with this edit? It doesn't seem to be effecting the article. eg. the article isn't redirecting, and is using my older edit.

However, that edit isn't what is wanted, Yeshiva Centre, has a Yeshiva, that is part of the Yeshiva Gedolah network. Likewise so is Yeshiva Gedolah in LA. As far as I know the Sydney branch is the only one that is a chabad Yeshiva. Can you please delete the Yeshiva Gedolah page and move this version of the page to Yeshiva Gedolah. I know many of the other branches would be offended to be called part of a chabad yeshiva network. ems 15:19, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• ems: Yeshiva Gedolah REDIRECTS to Yeshiva now, stop panicking. Where do you see any sort of official "network" when none exists? IZAK 15:23, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• Hi ems: It needs to be called something else then , because there are many other institutions, i.e yeshivas that use that name. It cannot have its old name. Many NON-Lubavitch "mitnagdishe" institutions and other groups use the name (of "Yeshiva Gedolah") and no-one can claim a "copy right" on this name, because it's just another generic name for yeshivas. For example there is at least one non-Chabad Yeshivah Gedolah in Los Angeles (California) and one in Johannesburg (South Africa), and many others, and they are not connected to each other (except by the Gemora they learn) but they all use that name. Thus, Yeshiva Gedolah must remain a REDIRECT to the main article of Yeshiva where the concepts and functions of Yeshiva gedolah, Yeshiva ketana, and Mesivta are described. As you suggested, Yeshiva Gedolah (Chabad-Lubavitch) is now a REDIRECT to Yeshiva Centre (which also may need to be changed because many yeshivas are considered to be the main "centres" of their communities and organizations as is the Lakewood yeshiva in Lakewood , New Jersey, or Ner Yisroel of Baltimore, Maryland.) Why do you think "Yeshiva Gedolah" should get its own article by the way? IZAK 15:20, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeshiva Gedolah is a network just like Tomchei Temimim, if Tomchei Temimim can have an article, I don't see why Yeshiva Gedolah can't. Yeshiva Centre is the name of an instute in Sydney Australia. Not a centre of Yeshiva. ems 15:45, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Yeshiva Gedolah in Sydney is, as far as I know, the only chabad member of the network. The LA branch is mitnagidishe, that is why I pointed it out. ems 15:48, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• ems: Since Lubavitch does work as a united organization its yeshivas could be called part of a "network" I suppose. But the non-Lubavitch yeshivas are not part of a "network" because none exists as such. This is not a word game that "just because they call something by a certain name then anyone else can call something by that name too". That is poor logic. The non-Lubavitch yeshivas are not part of a "network" unless they belong to very tightly connected central organizations (similar in that way to those of Lubavitch). Thus, in the United States, the Chofetz Chaim yeshiva has what it calls "branches" (something like a "network" I suppose) but they are not connected to other Orthodox yeshivas. Similarly, the Aish HaTorah yeshiva has branches all over the world, but they are not connected to others (they function INTERNALLY more like Chabad, but EXternally they are not part of a broader "network"). I think perhaps you are confusing the word "network" with an ideological similarity (i.e. of sharing a common hashkafa) by "identifying with," or an "affiliation with," that some yeshivas may have with Agudath Israel, or if they are Chasidim with whatever branch of Chasidim they belong to, thus any Satmar yeshiva in the world shares the views of Satmar ideology. They all have "Yeshiva Gedolahs" but it is false to say that they all form part of a "network" which makes it sound like they are organized, united, and working together, which is not true. Yes, the Lubavitchers, or Chofetz Chaim yeshiva, or Lakewood yeshiva, or Ner Yisroel yeshiva INDIVIDUALLY have their own "networks" (it's just a word you are throwing around) but there is no real collective "network" of yeshivas outside each of the groups themslves. By the way, in the US, there is an association that "certifies" all the major Orthodox yeshivas (AARTS: Association of Advanced Rabbinical and Talmudic Schools see [2]), but that does not make them into a "network" either, it's just a loose association for legal and government certification reasons only. Anyhow, I must get some sleep now, let me know what you think. Best wishes. By the way, I looked over some of your new stuff, it's nice but needs a little better editing as do lots of the new Orthoox-related articles popping up on Wikipedia. Nice to know more frum people want to share their knowledge with the world...IZAK 16:17, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I hear your points. What is the point of the redirect, now? ems 16:59, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• ems: There are two redirects here: 1) Yeshiva Gedolah redirects to Yeshiva, which means that Yeshiva Gedolah = Yeshiva (in the general sense of that word). And 2) Yeshiva Gedolah (Chabad-Lubavitch) redirects to Yeshiva Centre (and I do see that you created similar redirects to Yeshiva Centre, such as Yeshiva Gedolah (Sydney) which would have actually been the best way to identify it by creating a heading for it, i.e. to show that it's a Yeshiva Gedolah based in Sydney --why didn't you like that one?) At any rate, you needn't worry about Yeshiva Gedolah (Chabad-Lubavitch) for now because it does not mean that all Yeshiva Gedolahs are part of Lubavitch, but rather it's just a more specific designation of that school's orientation. Generally speaking if something or someone is derived from something more famous, then the lesser name must take "second place" to the larger name, if you get what I mean, or, the "less famous name" needs to be qualified by geographic or other labels (in this case that it's part of "Chabad-Lubavitch"). For now, in any case, noone is going to even know it's there, so I wouldn't worry about it. Do you have some concerns still? Please let me know. Thanks. IZAK 19:41, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

aniconism page

IZAK, I see you are now editing on the aniconism page. For some reason, this page will not save my edits. I did a few minor edits on Feb 5 which WERE saved, came back on the 6th and no-go. I am able to edit elsewhere, but not here -- and yes, I'm logged in. I have, among other things, an illo from the 14th century Bird's Head Haggadah plus some other refs that I'd LOVE to add if I could figure out WHY I cannot edit on this page. Any ideas??? Rooster613 16:24, 7 February 2006 (UTC)Rooster613

Me again -- actually, it lets me save if I click on editing the whole page, but not just the Judaism section. Weird. Must be a porblem iwth the index on the page. Anyway, I fixed a lot of typos and will not proceed to add the pic and refs I have... Rooster613 16:36, 7 February 2006 (UTC)Rooster613

• Hi Rooster: I am not an admin so I cannot help really. I suggest you get in touch with Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance) or Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) I am sure that there are technical experts there that can help you out in depth. Best wishes and Zai Gezunt! IZAK 16:40, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Strange interpretation

Looking over this vote, I'm at a loss to understand how the results could possibly be interpreted as "no consensus, defaults to keep". Comments? Tomer^talk 17:23, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Tomer: From my sad experience, there are admins out there who have some vary strange ideas about the application of math and the meaning of proportions when it comes to tallying up votes, is all I can say. I guess the redirects are decent outcomes too. At least a good number of people got to see the "system at work." IZAK 19:50, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

שלום

דבר ראשון לא נעים לי שאתה כותב עלי כאן הכפשות אני תרמתי רבות גם לוויקיפדיה האנגלית לרוב בנושאים שאני מתעניין בהם ואני רוצה לפתוח ערך חדש בשם Assassinations of Jewish leaders in Israel's history ולשם להכניס את כל הפסקה שהכנסת לערך על יגאל עמיר --Haham hanuka 18:53, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Haham, Shalom: Firstly: I do not have Hebrew fonts to type with. Secondly: I would appreciate it if you could "stay calm" on Wikipedia so that we do not have repeats of your patterns on the Hebrew Wikipedia here on the English as well. Thirdly: A new link and article for Assassinations of Jewish leaders in Israel's history is ok. Fourthly: I added the information not just to the Yigal Amir articel, but also to all the articles about the Jewish leaders that were assassinated as well. Finally: Take care. IZAK 19:55, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
  • הוויקיפדיה העברית ממש לא מעניינת אותי, אני בקרוב מקווה להתמנות פה למפעיל מערכת (אדמין). בנוסף שים לב שהמשתמש גידעון רודף אותי ומשחזר כל מה שאני מתקן כמו בערך שלמה ארצי שהורדתי את זה שהוא שחקן כי הוא רק זמר וכו'. אגב אם אתה מועוניין להקליד בעברית תגיד לי באיזה מערכת הפעלה אתה משתמש ואני יסביר לך מה לעשות. --Haham hanuka 09:34, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
    • Shalom Haham: Taslich li she'ani kotev kacha: Ani lo mevin lamah atah rotzeh la'azov et havipidia ha'ivrit legamri, im yesh lecha et hasafa bekal? Kanir'eh she'im yiheyeh lecha yoter derech eretz az yekablu otcha b'sever panim yafot. Kanir'eh yesh lecha oneg muzar melihishtageiya al ha-Internet, nachon? Aval ta'aseh mah she'ata rotzeh. Ein li kesharim im gidon ve'im shum adam prati sheyotz'im min haklal. Mitzidi, ani lo me'unyan bichlal liheyot admin beshum offen... eiza tachlis yavo mizeh? Efshar li, vegam lecha, lichtov hakol bli liheyot admin, ani muvtach. Be'emet achshav ein li z'man lehaklid be'ivrit, yesh li yoter midai mah la'asot be'anglit, aval todah lecha al habakasha la'azor. Maspik li achshav likro chomer be-Ivrit. Na lo lehishtagei'a... tov ?! Lehitraot! IZAK 10:55, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Please put in your two cents

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Criticism_of_the_Bible and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Inconsistencies_in_the_Bible. Thanks, Yoninah 20:53, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Yoninah: Thanks for bringing my attention to these. Best wishes, IZAK 19:56, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

"queer"?

Hi Joe: I came across this: List of Jewish American social and political scientists, and I noticed that a couple of people on it are marked as "queer theorist" ... what's that all about? There may be more of this, as someone has created a whole slew of small "lists of American Jews" which I'm now looking over. Is it the way the British refer to homosexuals? I dunno. Is it "politically correct" to call people "queer anything" on Wikipedia ? Thanks. IZAK 14:04, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Queer theory will probably help, and would be the proper link for that term (I'll link it), though I don't think our article on the topic is notably good. In particular, it fails to really get into why queer theory is called what it is. It is a conscious reappropriation of a term that was, for at least a century or so, used as an insulting term. Another reappropriation of the same term is the slogan "we're here, we're queer, get used to it" or the organization Queer Nation. In this case, it is the term used by people in the field, definitely the right term for these two people. Hope that helps; if not, please reply on my talk page & I'll try to explain further. - Jmabel | Talk 16:51, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Protocols of the Elders of Zion

Hi IZAK, I wanted to make sure I didn't offend you, but I reverted most of your stylistic changes to the article because I think the previous style was more likely to pass the FA, and seemed clearer to me. I generally really like the style of your work, so I could be wrong about this, thus I wanted to make sure you knew that it was not personal, and that I put a note on the article's talk page to discuss further. --Goodoldpolonius2 15:20, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Goodold, I will look at it again. I gave this a lot of thought before making the changes. IZAK 12:06, 12 February 2006 (UTC)