User talk:Nableezy/Archive 43

Archive 40

Archive 41

Archive 42

Archive 43

Archive 44

Archive 45

→

Archive 50

Thanks

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Without your extraordinary scrutiny, precision, and uncanny Holmesian abilities to nail down what the rest of us know or suspect but have to put up with, i.e., endless sockpuppetry, significant zones in this encyclopedia would be unworkable or reduced to propaganda retail outlets. If there is a patron saint for intellectual guardianship in the Abrahamic religions, (s)he's standing at your shoulder. Awarded by Nishidani (talk) 19:50, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Honestly, Yaniv is the easiest to spot if you care to spend the time looking. I'm sure he has a few more accounts at or near 500 edits, so just a brief respite is my guess. But I appreciate the kind words, as always, Nish. nableezy - 21:03, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Not awarded for Yaniv. You've caught scores, if not a hundred over the last decade or so, some of them very elusive, even if, as I said elsewhere, anyone with experience knows 99% of the time when a sock enters, and quite often, se several are still so unaware they haven't quite fixed those traces that confirm their individual signatures. I know I wouldn't have persisted here with these endless stooges on my heels had you not been around to do this kind of work.Nishidani (talk) 21:54, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

If NoCal stopped I might too tbh. nableezy - 03:54, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Well done, I am wondering just how many of these cursed accounts there are.:/Selfstudier (talk) 21:28, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Dozens, but one doesn't need to get paranoid. It's part of the work environment, and the important thing is to recognize the styles, and just keep working away. With patience, they undo themselves fairly quickly or Nableezy nabs'em. Thanks for your excellent work on the Covid woes of the territories by the way. Nishidani (talk) 21:54, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

tourism

Temple Mount in Hebron? What's that? Zero^talk 13:35, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Its not the first time that you restoring non constructive edits that were removed by banned user.You are talking responsibility for every edit that you make. Please be more careful in the future. --Shrike (talk) 14:50, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

There is a real difficulty here in establishing a precedent for allowing socks and IPs to edit indirectly, in violation of ARBPIA, by confirming even edits that are reasonable. Nableezy is within his rights to just revert, and since he is followed closely, it is no problem for those who disagree to assume the feathery burden of fixing the text as he leaves it. Apropos of exercising care, I hope you assume responsibility for the edits you also make when you, quite often, restore material added by obvious socks. 'Talk' by the way, is not a synonym of 'take'. Nishidani (talk) 15:47, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Zero, sorry, I see banned user edits and generally revert without paying attention. And Shrike, what WP:BRV actually says is This does not mean that edits must be reverted just because they were made by a banned editor (changes that are obviously helpful, such as fixing typos or undoing vandalism, can be allowed to stand), but the presumption in ambiguous cases should be to revert. Can be allowed to stand sure, but no reverting edits made in violation of a ban do not require me to taking responsibility for the edit. As always, any editor in good standing is free to revert those edits, and they can take responsibility for them. But if I see Yaniv edits I will continue to revert them. nableezy - 22:14, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Blips for your radar.

There is a couple of chaps with a peculiar editing history here.     ←   ZScarpia   15:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Users with indefinitely protected user talk pages". Thank you. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:19, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:43, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Jabel Mukaber

This edit of yours was wrong for several reasons:

1. The fact that some things have been in an article is not in itself reason to revert. Otherwise, we could name make any change to any article. Reverting to a stable version is something that can be done in case of a disagreement. However, there is nothing in the edit summary or on the talkpage that gives indication of any disagreement. The stated reasons "rv to stable version" is invalid.
2. You reverted three of my edits in one wholesale revert. Apart from the fact that that is very inconsiderate, I am sure that at least one of those edits, sorting See also entries alphabetically, was completely uncontroversial.

I have reverted you, and if you have any issue with my edits, please discuss. If you think there is something that need to be reverted right away, and can't way till after discussion, although I sincerely doubt that would be justified, at least be a conscientious editor and revert only that part of my edits. And please indicate the reason for the revert in the edit summary, or on the talkpage. Debresser (talk) 16:53, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

I actually kept the changes I agreed with, and it is incumbent on you to make your case for a change. Not continue to edit war in the incredibly hypocritical do as I say not as I do attitude that has been a hallmark of your experience here. Restoring. nableezy - 20:24, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Oh, I see that is already done by somebody else. I am sure you will be lecturing them about how they are edit-warring and you are not. nableezy - 20:24, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

FYI

Progress

Thoughts?

[1]

SVG map?

Hey, do you know how to edit SVG maps? This map lacks stripes at occupied territories: [2]. Do you think you can create a new version? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:33, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Can try to look at it. But not that great at it. Pinging Fjmustak as they were the person who knew how these things worked back in the day iirc. nableezy - 22:28, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

ANI

Browser jump misclick, sorry about that. Acroterion (talk) 00:09, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

no worries, nableezy - 00:10, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

WP:STALK

Keep it up and I'll report you stalking my edits at ANI. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 23:43, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

loll, you think I am stalking you to articles I have been editing for over a decade? Good luck with that one. nableezy - 23:44, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 23:54, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

You're now up to 8 pages that you've suddenly appeared at purely to revert my edits, and 90% of your edits in the last few days consist of reverting me at various pages in the PIA area. Want to keep going to 10, 15 or 20 before I have to bring it up again at ANI, or are you just that confident that admins will circle the wagons and deny anything's going on? Wikieditor19920 (talk) 01:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

It is blatantly obvious what you are doing, and I literally do not care, except for the fact that you perform WP:BLINDREVERTs at each page, accuse me of POV, and scream that my counter points are the dumbest thing you ever heard in almost every single instance. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 01:15, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Genius, you are going through a series of core articles on a topic area I have been editing for years and making substantial changes to the lead of those articles. And in each of those articles I have been editing that article for years and years before you ever joined this site. There is nothing sudden about it. I see the changes in my watchlist and revert them when I do. I am not obliged to watch you turn article after article to shit just because Ive already reverted you previously. When I see shit edits to articles in my watchlist I revert them. You do not get to demand that your changes stick, and you if you want to make the truly idiotic claim that I am following you to articles I was at years before you made this account then yes I am confident that any admin will see that as the idiotic claim that it is. These articles are in my watchlist. Pretty much every article in the Arab-Israeli topic area is in my watchlist. I see when you make a shitty edit. And I see when you make ones I dont mind. Those I dont revert. The shitty ones, the POV ones, yes those I revert. And will continue to do so without giving who made the edit a single thought. Maybe stop making wholesale changes to the leads of a bunch of articles at once? nableezy - 03:00, 9 March 2021 (UTC) 03:00, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your tireless work on Palestine-Israel articles. Thank you so much! Snuish (talk) 04:02, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Arab states–Israeli alliance against Iran article

On reflection, I think you are right, there is little point in pressing the case so I have removed the RFC tag and will not involve myself further there.Selfstudier (talk) 11:41, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

probably the move. nableezy - 13:27, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Starting 2 new discussions on the talk page right after you used an ANI to basically silence an editor with opposing views gives the appearance that you are trying to silence dissent in order to avoid having a robust discussion. I strongly recommend that you drop the ANI against @Wikieditor19920 (I happen to think that the ANI was petty and vindictive anyway) and invite him/her to respectfully participate in this discussion. If you insist on pursuing the ANI, then I think you really should avoid behavior that suggests possible impropriety--Steamboat2020 (talk) 21:32, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Im sorry what? I started two sections because it is two topics to discuss. Nobody is restricted from replying to those sections. You are certainly free to do so. This is not supposed to be a player vs player situation, you can actually answer the questions asked on the talk page and discuss the article as I am trying to do. nableezy - 21:34, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Oh come on! You know very well that @Wikieditor19920 has to walk on eggshells and will be afraid to comment further on that page with an active ANI against him/her.--Steamboat2020 (talk) 21:44, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

I really dont see how that is relevant. Or true for that matter. Personal attacks arent a necessary response to an editor (me) asking for sourcing. I really dont see why you are here instead of responding at the talk page if you think I am incorrect. nableezy - 21:47, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

"personal attacks"????? I said your actions give the appearance of trying to silence dissent and recommended that you really should avoid behavior that suggests possible impropriety. What part of that was a personal attack? I think I deserve an apology--Steamboat2020 (talk) 21:54, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

I did not mean you. I was referring to the idea that WE would have to walk on eggshells. I brought WE to ANI over personalizing disputes and making attacks. That is the only concern I had. He is certainly free to respond sans attacks. nableezy - 22:03, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Also, can you please read WP:INDENT? You just add one : each level, not multiple ones. nableezy - 22:04, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

A video for you

Hi, Nableezy. Here is a video for you on the Jews of Yemen (in Arabic), filmed by a Soviet film crew in 1929, under the directorship of Vladimir A. Shneyderova and operator Ilya Moiseevich Tolchan. Would that Jews and Arabs in all places can get along, to make our world a better place.Davidbena (talk) 05:36, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I mean I still like you David, so thats a start right? nableezy - 05:38, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Of course it is. Hoping, though, that this mutual feeling will spread throughout Wikipedia.Davidbena (talk) 05:53, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Idk David, not feeling the love emanating from this place rn but one can hope. Spring is coming after all. nableezy - 05:56, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Yeah. I feel the same way. Wikipedians can improve themselves, I mean, to show more common respect and decency, and to debate our differences with civility. We can ALL learn from one another. The Arab language and culture have, believe it or not, helped us in Israel to preserve our own Jewish heritage and culture. Even the Hebrew language and the meanings of Old Hebrew words could not have been fully understood without the Arabic. You see, a great loss came upon the Jewish people because of their long and frequent exiles. Realizing this, I would think, is the first step for Jews to bridge the gap between our two peoples.Davidbena (talk) 06:07, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

David, as ever, I think you are a kind and decent human and I hope you and your family are well and staying safe inshaallah. nableezy - 06:11, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Logged warning (escalated)

Hi. I have logged a warning against you to tone down on the aggression and derision. Please note that if you prove unwilling or unable to to significantly moderate your conduct in this regard, ARBPIA sanctions are likely to be imminent. El_C 14:52, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Got it. nableezy - 14:56, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I hope you have. I've always had a sneaking suspicion that you're a hypercompetitive buggah, Nableezy, in the sense that you're angling, with that loutish attitude, for a permaban just to knock me down a peg or two by earning a similar distinction. I'm on oath that from now on in, if you persist in that devious behavior and get one, I'll be rewriting all of the articles on Egypt to document the thesis that all the soi-disant,uh, 'plundering' of its antiquities and their safeguarding in Western museums was an historical necessity done purely out of the Whiteman's sense of obligation to the aesthetic interests of humanity at large, and you, 'sand'bagged, won't be able to lift a finger to revert me.Nishidani (talk) 15:48, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I need to be calmer and more patient, and I am totally aware of how thin the ice I skate on is now. As far as antiquities, the local art museum has fairly impressive ancient Egypt collection, but it's all in the basement. Not a single piece is on display. But I went to a talk they hosted where they went through a lot of the collection and they had this quote from the benefactor of a lot of the pieces, Amelia Edwards: Such is the fate of every Egyptian monument, great or small ... every day, more inscriptions are mutilated, more tombs are rifled, more paintings and sculptures are defaced and I was like but wait, you mean us and not you. I doubt youve ever heard the song W-4 by dead prez, but the line make a ** wanna wild out, run up in the White House with the gauge out click clack, give me my shit back resonated deep in my soul that day. If you need that translated to old fart lmk. nableezy - 17:22, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the quite accurate 'old fart', raghead (alert for lurking wikietiquetters, insults are permitted on this page). A blowhard like myself, windy as the plain of Troy, to misquote Tennyson, needs to be 'rap'ped over the chucklehead when afflicted by a geezer's late habit of handing out shovel-loads of advice. As I meditated on events, mixing slurry and fixing old Roman stones into a vegie patch wall I'm building, there came to mind a quote which I can't recall without remembering how I came across it.

In 1966, hearing of a book sale at Warrandyte, I wagged school and, taking a month's pocket money, trained out to that bushland township, and trembled at the treasures there, being flogged for almost nothing. I got the collected short stories in 10 volumes of Maupassant for 2 dollars. And there, as I was about to go, was a somewhat ragged tome (634 pages) in a two column fine print format, of Ralph Waldo Emerson's collected Works: Essays, first and second series, Representative men, Society and solitude, English traits, The conduct of life, Letters and social aims, Poems, Miscellanies embracing nature, addresses, and lectures. I'd only knew of him from the praise Nietzsche unusually lavished on him (I'd just read, dazzled, Geoffrey Clive's big anthology The Philosophy of Nietzsche,). I'd already wiped my savings out, and anxiously flipped the cover to see the price . . 25 cents!

It was a thrilling experience to read that prose, full of gems ('An institution is the lengthened shadow of one man') that stick without an effort at memorization. And the one that came to mind this afternoon about your recent run in goes:-

: 'We live amid surfaces, and the true art of life is to skate well upon them'. Ralph Waldo Emerson,'Experience', in Works, Routledge 1883 p.95.

As with wiki, my best intentions (regarding my education) got me into trouble: the letter I forged in my parents' name to excuse my absence that day was rejected (I'm a good calligrapher, but nowhere as genuinely re-authenticative as my brother, who just sent me a photo of his perfect scale reproduction on a friend's wall of Banksy's famous mural) phone calls were made and my cover was blown. But my parents just said they'd drive me on the day after, Saturday, and fork out however much I needed to get whatever books I couldn't snap up on my own.

Moral? Do some fucken homework, and read two or three of Emerson's essays, say on 'Manners'. If you survive wiki another few years, and I don't cark it in the interim, I'll offer to take you on a guided tour of Turin's magnificent Museo Egizio. This place needs you more than it does slippered pantaloonish old farts like me. Nishidani (talk) 19:56, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry. Eurocentric waspish presumption. I'll buy the tickets and pay for lunch. You're the guide. Anyway, I'm watching The Gauntlet. I get the feeling that for a while ahead, you'll have to take some tips from Ben Shockley on survival, apart from reading Emerson on manners.Nishidani (talk) 20:40, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Nableezy. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimothyBlue (talk • contribs) 23:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Um

Is that legit? Regardless, it's not on, reallySelfstudier (talk) 22:52, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Mohammed El-Kurd

R u OK with my adding the Arbpia notices?Selfstudier (talk) 14:11, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

yeah of course. nableezy - 15:44, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Okay but what is the point

I will stop until I have 500 edits, but what is the point of reversing the edits that adds that the US Government disputes this, I am just wondering the point of that. [User:Mohamed Taqi]](talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:36, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Because a. it isnt relevant, b. it is expected to be reversed (see eg) and c. international community does not mean every single country. If we arent listing out every country that considers it illegal there is no reason to single out the one(!) that does not, excepting Israel. nableezy - 23:38, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Additionally, changing the template to claim that settlements outside of Israel are "Israel geography articles" is a straightforward error. nableezy - 23:40, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

hi there

hi there. welcome back! nice to see you here. it's been a while!! how have you been? cheers! ---Sm8900 (talk) 🌍 15:10, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Hey Sm8900, hanging in there but it's been a year (says everyone). Hope you and yours are well. nableezy - 15:31, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

EJ

@Nishidani and Onceinawhile: Hi, I have put up an outline article covering Palestinian displacement in East Jerusalem by way of evictions and demolitions. I will keep adding sources but it needs work so please help if you have time. Many thanks.Selfstudier (talk) 09:42, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

I've added some material from files. As usual, I screwed up somewhere along the line, so that a section 1967-2021 ended up in the footnotes. Can some young nurse from Wikipedia's flying squad of wikigeriatric carers rearrange the mess? Cheers Nishidani (talk) 10:42, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

I wish you had used a different title but will add some things. nableezy - 12:53, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Sorry you don't like it, what did you have in mind? I could change it maybe but (forced) displacement is very common in sources.(I did send you a mail but you didn't reply).Selfstudier (talk) 13:15, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

'Evictions and Displacements' seems to cover all of the concrete consequences of the policy of ethnic cleansing.Nishidani (talk) 13:18, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Expulsions. nableezy - 13:58, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Well yes, I didn't want to be accused of jumping the gun on the SJ RFC. If that gets the nod there, then expulsions is another way of saying it, true.Selfstudier (talk) 14:01, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Doesnt matter, you arent covering any one "property dispute", but the wider expulsions of Palestinians from East Jerusalem. nableezy - 14:04, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Although, describing displacement that results from demolitions is not usually referred to as expulsions, might have to be "displacement and expulsion from" Selfstudier (talk) 14:14, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Possible SPI

I noticed you raised an SPI for Firkin Flying Fox and wonder if they are back. Here come the Suns, who was a suspected sock of NoCal100, was indef'd 7 January 2020. 108.45.91.166 then edits from 16 January 2020 to 20 October 2020. Pretzel butterfly then edits from 13 January 2021 until the accounted is replaced by Benevolent human (Bh). Bh says they are not the IP, but the IP tried to get accusations of anti-Semitism added to Tlaib, while Pretzel butterfly did the same for AOC and Bh for Omar. The IP had added similar material to the Jeremy Corbyn article. The IP was obviously experienced and frustrated about the 500/30 rule.

I thought of raising an SPI but thought I would ask your opinion first.

TFD (talk) 23:25, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Do not think Bh is NoCal no. nableezy - 13:42, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict...please fill out my survey?

Hello :) I am writing my MA dissertation on Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and I noticed that you have contributed to those pages. My dissertation will look at the process of collaborative knowledge production on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the effect it has on bias in the articles. This will involve understanding the profiles and motivations of editors, contention/controversy and dispute resolution in the talk pages, and bias in the final article.

For more information, you can check out my meta-wiki research page or my user page, where I will be posting my findings when I am done.

I would greatly appreciate if you could take 5 minutes to fill out this quick survey before 8 August 2021.

Participation in this survey is entirely voluntary and anonymous. There are no foreseeable risks nor benefits to you associated with this project.

Thanks so much,

Sarah Sanbar

Sarabnas ^{I'm researching Wikipedia} _Questions? 16:08, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Scams

Of course, while some scams get our attention, it's worthwhile reminding oneself from time to time, as I'm sure you do, that these rorts are now inbuilt into the very pith and marrow of the social systems we ourselves live in. I found this pertinent. No need to reply.Nishidani (talk) 10:46, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

October 2021

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Israeli_regional_councils_in_the_West_Bank&diff=1048539646&oldid=1048539550 (adding [[Category:Judea and Samaria Area]] to Category:Israeli regional councils in the West Bank), did not appear to be constructive. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. TerraCyprus (talk) 15:06, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Cute. nableezy - 15:08, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I'm TerraCyprus. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction, such as your addition to User talk:TerraCyprus. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Thank you. TerraCyprus (talk) 15:09, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Even cuter. nableezy - 15:11, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Broken 1RR

You restored Selfstudier bit[3] about illegality of settlements please revert yourself--Shrike (talk) 18:02, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

No I did not. Selfstudier added material to the lead. I added it to the body. Pay attention, you removed it from the body, and falsely claimed it was added to the lead. And refused to justify your initial removal to begin with. You should be sanctioned for serial tendentious editing. nableezy - 18:06, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter where you added the text. I also already explained on talk page before that its WP:UNDUE. --Shrike (talk) 18:13, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

No you did not, and yes it does matter. The material I initially added was not a revert. And if you want to take it to AE I would love to ask that the abuse of ONUS be looked at and editors who continuously edit tendentiously, such as your good self, be banned from the topic area. nableezy - 18:14, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Sure giving Barnstar of Diplomacy may be considered ironic by some, but I wanted to thank you for your contribution in the Talk:Israel for representing those who do not even have an Internet access at times. LostCitrationHunter (talk) 15:13, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Well this is certainly the least deserved barnstar in Wikipedia history, but I appreciate the sentiment. nableezy - 15:18, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Nableezy would merit several barnstars, but a barnstar for 'diplomacy' comes close to defamation of character.:) Nishidani (talk) 15:24, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

If you count the act of deleting a comment before pressing save page as it would violate any number of policies then maybe I qualify? nableezy - 15:29, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Ya got me by the short and curlies there. That's stealth diplomacy by an unsung hero indeed. There's shuttle diplomacy but I think you'll have to settle for the barnstar of (self-) shut up diplomacy.Nishidani (talk) 20:01, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

You're tangentially involved in an ANI discussion

I wanted to notify you that you're tangentially involved in an issue I've raised at ANI in this discussion. Thanks! ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 19:36, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

E1

Currently E1 (Jerusalem) with a bunch of redirects.

You had some conversation back in 2013, it's not in Jerusalem, or even East Jerusalem, should be E1 (West Bank)?(It's most often referred to as just E1 (need disambiguation) or E1 plan)? Selfstudier (talk) 11:07, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Made a move request. nableezy - 14:39, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Reversion crossed with your edit

Sorry, my reversion crossed with your edit. But as I wrote, this is for Nishidani to decide, in particular whether he wants to add the off topic aside in the first place now that it comes up. Sesquivalent (talk) 19:14, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

You can assume he wants something he wrote posted on the talk page. If you have a problem with where he put it, and oh by the way thats a result of you reindenting each part of your comment so that it looks like a new one, then move it. nableezy - 14:39, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

I do not object to one user splitting another's comments at a natural breaking point, as was the case here, when that keeps the discussion more focused. Here the content of the acceptably placed insertion had the opposite effect, sidetracking the discussion by using another's comments as nothing but a stage for off topic asides. My edit summary for the revert reflected this distinction. It's not clear to me why you had to intervene rather than seeing if Nish would take the message, or for that matter why you are policing the meta and metameta aspects of the thread on his behalf (with no contribution to the object level edit discussion on the article) but it's water under the bridge at this point. Sesquivalent (talk) 20:33, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

What you think is off-topic is a personal opinion, and one you may not enforce on others. Read WP:TPO, especially the Your idea of what is off topic may differ from what others think is off topic, so be sure to err on the side of caution. Kindly do not remove others comments. Thanks in advance. I also am addressing the actual topic on the page, that being a user thinking they are qualified to challenge a reliable source with ruminations that might be described in any number of ways, but Ill go with not in keeping with our policies on reliable sources and verifiability. You challenged a source, were given a quote, and continued challenging it as though you were a qualified reliable source. Hint, you are not. As far as why you removed it, thats cute, but what you said was not that, what you said was it should not be inserted while splitting. It isnt splitting anything, and then you remove it again. Huh. At least you thought better of doing that again, cus hint, the talk page is covered by the 1RR too. nableezy - 20:39, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Look, serious wiki editing is painstaking. I could reply infinitely on an infinite number of small points in any thread. I generally shut up, and try to stick strictly to the gravamen. That remark directly under your remark was just a reminder of a broader context few know about. If you indented separately a double post and I interleaved it to your dissatisfaction, the simple thing was to shift it under the second, without even notifying me. Solved. No working other editor's workpages, sensible, quick, efficient, so people can be focused on what counts. (To me it counts in a discussion on Israeli Arab education in the 60s, the comparative figures to note what we only learnt a few months back: that Israel appears to have thought undereducated Arabs were a net plus). That's it. No thread on this please.Nishidani (talk) 20:44, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

My interest in discussion decreases exponentially in the number of meta levels. But your comment on the edit summary is pretty interesting, since I am not personally aware of a level of pedantry and hermeneutics sufficient to differentiate the statements. My above explanation of my position, and the first sentence of the edit summary, both parse to the proposition "NOT (split AND OffTopicAside)". The second sentence of the edit summary says "IF (OffTopicAside) then NOT (split)", in grammatical English. All three statements are logically equivalent, unless you are somehow parsing these finer than a truth table. I think this is the first time in my long experience on the Internet in which it actually became necessary to parse down to explicit propositional logic to explain something, and the first time somebody is so determined to invent a distinction that ordinary logic becomes insufficient. (Or you could just be wrong.) Sesquivalent (talk) 04:07, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Uh, your edit summary very clearly says that if it did not split your comment then it would not be removed. So I made it so that it did not split your comment. Other than that, I really dont have a whole lot of interest in pretty much anything else written here. nableezy - 15:37, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi

Would you say that "fellow traveler" is a commonly used expression? (US spelling) Selfstudier (talk) 15:02, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Not especially common or uncommon Id say. nableezy - 15:10, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

1RR x 17

You broke the 1RR ARBPIA restriction in 17 or so articles in the past hour. Please self revert. Free1Soul (talk) 17:44, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Um, I reverted you and only you. Once. nableezy - 17:44, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

But of course, if you can tell me which edits I reverted in my initial edits, Id be happy to self-revert. But as far as I am aware, those are all edits, not reverts. nableezy - 17:49, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

In each article you made two reverts, the first being of the editor(s) who added the map to begin with and the second being my challenge of your change. Removing a map undos the action of the editor who added the map - it is a revert, not just an edit. Self revert. Free1Soul (talk) 17:51, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

No I dont believe that to be true, modifying an edit from years ago has never been taken as a revert, and in several cases the map was added by an IP who was disallowed from doing so in the first place. Can you point to any edit I reverted in my initial edit? If you want to report it feel free, but I will certainly be raising the blatant WP:HOUNDING done by you. nableezy - 17:52, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Ill self revert for now, but will be raising this elsewhere. nableezy - 17:54, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Well maybe case by case, will look to see if I can even find an edit that needs to be reverted. nableezy - 17:55, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Have not found a single article where a map was added within the last year, making all of those edits. If any admin says those are reverts I will gladly self-revert. But reverting due to an editor hounding me across a range of articles is not one of the things I plan on doing. nableezy - 18:04, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

As you requested admin input, and since the statment above is false (in two articles it was added in the last year), I took this to AE for admin input. Free1Soul (talk) 18:26, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Largest City of Israel

Hello, me again, you forgot to add what would be the largest city of Israel if East Jerusalem were to be excluded. I suggest changing the note

From: "Jerusalem is Israel's largest city if including East Jerusalem, which is widely recognized as occupied territory."

To: "Tel Aviv is Israel's largest city if excluding East Jerusalem, which is widely recognized as occupied territory."

Thanks and have a good day! - Chxeese (talk) 23:16, 17 October 2021 (UTC)