User talk:Yoninah/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Yoninah. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Simchat Torah

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi! What was your reason for removing references to hard alcohol? The references were sourced. Like it or not, it is a [[WP{N|notable]] custom. See WP:NOT#CENSORED. Best, --Shirahadasha 02:30, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi Yoninah: Bruchim HaBaim it is a true joy to see you editing. May Hashem grant you the strength and wisdom (and enjoyment!) to continue doing so. Wow, it's great having you here. IZAK 08:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Massacre of Uman

Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion

Hi Yoninah: User TShilo12 (talk · contribs) asked me a question about Massacre of Uman and perhaps someone here can help him out. The qustion he asks is: "I just listened to a program of Gavriel Aryeh Sanders' (http://www.gavrielsanders/com/) on Uman, and went and looked up the city article, and found a link to this article, which seems to have no references and a lot of weaselwording. I don't know whose attention it would be best to bring this to, to effect some improvement, so I'm hoping that by bringing it to your attention, that you will know whom best to contact." Please contact User:TShilo12 if you are able to help him. Thank you, IZAK 05:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi again Yoninah: Thanks for making the effort to answer User:TShilo12 who will no doubt appreciate it (as soon as he logs back on) and will be most grateful to you. All your efforts are truly appreciated. We need more of your time and expertise (yes, by now you are already at least a halbe maven if not a gantze maven about what gives on Wikipedia) so hopefully we can get more of your input on Judaism-related topics and articles. Thanks again, IZAK 12:11, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Yoninah, if you are interested, here are a few articles that need lots of help that you may have an interest in improving: Devekut; Mitzvah tantz; Tish (Hasidic celebration); God of Abraham and see all the "stubs" that need help in Category:Hasidic Judaism stubs. Thanks a ton and tizki lemtzvos! IZAK 12:11, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Assessment ratings

Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Yoninah, I replied to you on my talk page and I am not sure if you saw this, so I am reposting my response to you here again: Good to hear from you. A Freilichen Chanukah! You can do this (change the assessment ratings) on your own, see all the details and criteria at Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism/Assessment. The so-called "ratings" to articles are added by a "bot" -- not a human, and if you have any doubts, you can always click on the "history" button at the top of the page of any article and you can see who has been involved in rating any article. I have not been involved with the "assessment" project. User:Eliyak is involved with it. I think that User:Java7837 was involved with the project, and perhaps also User:Shirahadasha. You can also ask around and leave a request at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism there is always someone there who knows things and will get back to you. Hope this helps. IZAK (talk) 18:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I've responded at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism#Assessment ratings. Assessments aren't really necessary, but they can be helpful; especially by browsing the article categories by quality and by importance. All the best, Eliyak T·C 05:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

The assessment rating is determined by any editor who feels that the article meets the criteria found here. It's really just a way of letting other editors know where the best/worst articles can be found, and to help us all pay attention to the articles that need it. It's also used in determining which articles are included in the CD version of Wikipedia. To get a feeling of what might constitute a high, medium or low article, see the relevant categories (Low, Mid, High, Top). Again, it's user-determined, and not always easy to decide, but keep in mind that the system works best if the articles are fairly evenly districuted between high, mid and low ratings. To understand the current distribution spread, meditate on this for a while.

I've found it easiest to decide what gets rated as "low." That includes various specific synagogues, schools, organizations and trivia which, if they disappeared tomorrow, would not leave much missing in the grand scheme of things. "High" is for those topics which either have general importance througout Judaism, or else have central importance in a specific branch of Judaism. "Mid" falls somewhere in between.

As for Shalom Zachar, I felt that it is a B class, because it's well-written, but not an A class because it could probably discuss the Shalom Zachar more in depth, such as including customs of specific communities and how it was observed at various times and places. "A" class is really for exceptional articles. I rated it as "mid" and not "high" because it didn't seem to have the sort of key importance found in "high" articles. If you disagree, you of course have the right to change the rating. Remember, the rating is not a "seal of approval," but an assessment of the article for other editors' benefit. --Eliyak T·C 02:27, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the more detailed explanation. When I looked at this, I was shocked that 80% of the Jewish articles are at the level of Stub or Start class! Either that means there's really a lot more work to do, or maybe we're setting too high a mark for ourselves? Yoninah (talk) 21:50, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the average over all Wikipedia is about 94%! --Eliyak T·C 21:58, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Hanoch Teller

Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Hi Yoninah: Hope you are well. Could you take a look at the Rabbi Hanoch Teller article, as his notability has been questioned by someone who knows nothing about the subject. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 08:37, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for all the great work with this! IZAK (talk) 08:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

rabbis

Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion

I see your points you are right they should go under Hasidic rabbis in Israel--Java7837 (talk) 21:30, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

A Russian rabbi can mean a rabbi in russia or rabbi who's ancestors were from Russia--Java7837 (talk) 21:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I am going through all of the rabbi categories and will eventually add more articles to the Russian Orthodox rabbis category--Java7837 (talk) 22:40, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

New rabbi categories sprouting like mushrooms

Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Sorry, I've been away for a week. Is this still an issue? Is there a discussion about this going on somewhere? Jayjg ^(talk) 03:37, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

No, I didn't start that discussion. I'll take a look. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Schick picture

Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

What is the source of the picture? Do you have a link? Jayjg ^(talk) 01:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's obviously the same picture, though the uploaded one is larger and better quality. It has been uploaded on the Commons, so it would have to be deleted there. That editor has uploaded a number of other images that have been deleted there. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:00, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Chaim Michael Dov Weissmandl

Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments1 person in discussion

Hi Yoninah; the citation was there before I added my edit; but I didn't feel it was right to remove it although I know it as factual. So now I've made it myself look as if someone is questioning my edit.

The truth is that very little of that article has citations, and the reason probably is because most history of that great man hasn't yet been written. The public and private life of this multifaceted genius of a man is as of now sitting in the collective memories of all who knew him and those who know/knew those who knew him. I think that contemporary history has a problem of citing sources, as much isn't yet published. What's the solution; wait another century until someone publishes it? Itzse (talk) 22:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Yoninah; I heard it from a person who was there, and also from a person who knew and heard from many who were there. If Wikipedia policy says to delete it, then be my guest and delete it. I would just caution you, that if indeed this policy is above all others, then we could do WP a favor and delete at least half of it; because a good part of the information it has; although true, has never been published. It's there because people edit those topics where they are at home; they don't sit and copy words from books.

I don't know about you; so I'll only talk about myself; that almost everything that I ever edited was taken straight out of memory, only when not absolutely sure, I'll go check it out; and I don't remember ever having made any serious mistake. I'm thinking, it might be fun to tag every undocumented fact for a citation; fun for me, that is; but keep in mind Wikipedias most important rule, which is to Ignore all rules. This rule states that "Every policy, guideline or any other rule may be ignored if it hinders improving Wikipedia". I personally only tag items which I question or I know it as outright not true; the rest I leave, especially if it gives the reader more knowledge of a subject; which is the definition of improving Wikipedia. Itzse (talk) 19:46, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

This time my response is on my page; thanks. Itzse (talk) 16:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

You’d probably be interested that all this got me to create a new article for Hanson W. Baldwin; all thanks to you. All the best. Itzse (talk) 23:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

In appreciation

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi Yoninah; I am honored by your bestowing on me the Original Barnstar Award. It feels good to know that there are those who appreciate my work. Yours' is the first award that I ever received, after being here for almost two and a half years. It sometimes feels as if I'm all alone here, as most people either don't care or don't notice. Although in real life my work is appreciated; here for the first time, you have broken the ice. Thanks again and good luck in all your endeavors. Itzse (talk) 18:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Caravanim

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please use some more references for this article. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Caravanim

Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

An article that you have been involved in editing, Caravanim, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caravanim. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Shuki (talk) 23:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Yoninah. I had a look at the article on caravanim and I can understand why it is being considered for deletion. As an article in Hebrew Wikipedia, it might be justified, but I think the information could just as well be added to a generic article on mobile homes (citing the political use of the "caravan" or "caravilla" in Israel) or perhaps an article on "housing in Israel" or the "Israeli settlement enterprise" or "Immigration to Israel." That is my feeling, but I don't want to take sides in the deletion vote. I don't think the issue is that critical.--Gilabrand (talk) 09:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

So your Caravanim article survived the AfD vote. Good for you. Personally, I thought it would be merged with trailer but I did vote to keep it. Artene50 (talk) 21:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Yishuv Hayashan

Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments1 person in discussion

Hello! Rabbi or Mr. Yoninah. I am relativelly new in the Wikipedia, but I see that the Zionists made themselves very comfortable here, and are attacking everyone that believes different then them. I have created the Yishuv haYashan article, which is something important historically speaking. I see they are trying to remove any information about the Haredim who didn't participate in the Zionist movement. Furthermore the whole history of the Yishuv haYashan Kollelim was ignored but instead an article about Halukka in a negative spotlight. They are trying to persuade that all those who did for our brothers in Eretz Yisroel were Zionists. I would suggest that we incorporate in a WikiProject:Yishuv haYashan or WikiProject:Torah Judaism in order to clearify the facts.

HagiMalachi (talk) 16:33, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

When I have atarted the article, I have put more information in the introduction, but it was deleted because it didn't fit the Zionist aims!HagiMalachi (talk) 20:48, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Please look at this, I think you will understand what I meen.

HagiMalachi (talk) 20:55, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

At least I have you on my side! Thanks! HagiMalachi (talk) 21:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Bobby Driscoll

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello, thanks a lot for coyediting the article on Bobby Driscoll, but I had to correct a detail in his bio concerning his graduation, in the meantime I/we could reliably verify. Regards:--Bylot (talk) 11:11, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Usain Bolt

Latest comment: 16 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion

Hi there, just working on expanding from some new sources for the article at the moment. I was thinking about what you said and I think you're right. Maybe the best thing to do is move more info off the body and into the personal life section. Like perhaps simplify the start by removing the place of birth and fast bowler info and zipping straight to doing well in parish meetings and playing cricket. I want the main body to focus on athletics so that info isn't crucial. However, cricket needs to be mentioned as his coaches suggestions caused him to start in track and field. Look at my changes in five mins and see what you think. Cheers. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 19:37, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

OK. That's the switch stuff done. I've managed to find more information regarding his early life so I'm expanding the sections which are just a chronology of times basically. I was a little defensive about comments saying the article was dry but I now see that it is a little over "number-y" in parts. What do you think of the change? Sillyfolkboy (talk) 19:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I understand, but please consider the fact that none of these articles are of featured article standard, many of them have even failed in their nominations. Take a look at Michael Jordan, Donald Bradman and Ian Thorpe. Maybe we should move the info about his family and the cricket and athletics heroes to the beginning of the early life section? I think the dancing thing and the charity thing along with the sponsorship should remain in personal life. What do you think? I reckon i can incorporate the first para of the section into the main body if that's what you think is best. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 22:43, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Another user moved the info back to "Early Life". I have much expanded the early life section now with new sources I found. I think this may have solved your issues with the article in another way. I have to admit that my defence of the personal life section is partly based upon the fact that I don't want the sponsorship info mixed with the world record paragraph as it would sound like an endorsement or advertisement. Hope you like the new expansion. When I was reading the article it's from I thought it was so funny! Sillyfolkboy (talk) 14:10, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it's still a little soon for the top titles to have full blown biographies of Bolt but I expect they'll be front page of next months issues and I'll add whatever I can. I've searched through the archives of Caribbean Net News (a caribbean half newspaper-half news aggregator) and taken a bunch of things from old news articles today. Not much about his family life but plenty of stuff from his trainer and his early athletics days. I know he's got a brother who plays cricket but yes that info is still lacking.

Also, I know that a red user name suggests a newbie to many users but the length of my talk page and quality of my edits eventually proves otherwise. Or so I believe! If anything it makes others question my edits more which is always a good thing. Be sure to keep an eye on things and I'm sure those short little sections will take care of themselves! Take care. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 20:50, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Cheers. Glad your satisfied with it! Sillyfolkboy (talk) 16:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Dear YONINAH,

yes, I own some documents in Slovak language that he was born November 23.1885. The difference between the dates of birth could arise by recalculation from the Jewish calendar. He was born in the year (5)646, which is of course the year 1886. But if the date is after September (November 23), in Jewish calendar is next year already.

Alex 92.245.193.10 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.245.193.10 (talk) 19:27, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Dear Yoninah, thank you for changes to the birtdate in the article, I do not think inserting my reference is needful, important is that the birtdate be correct. Unfortunately, all the articles I have seen on Internet have the birtdate 1886 (even the articles of renowned authors). Now I hope they all will make it correct. The article of S.D.Ungar is really good, are you the author? If so, I would like to know the sources. I know two of them: S.Fried - A Cry from the Pages and A.Fuchs - The Unheeded Cry.

Best wishes. Alex —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.245.193.10 (talk) 18:07, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank...

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

...you :) DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 23:59, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Union Fire Company

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It looks like it's pretty much a word for word copy. I've tagged it as a copyright violation; if it doesn't get deleted in the next few days I'll delete it myself. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:33, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Sofer

Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello. I am not smart-(or knowledgeable) enough to answer the question. I was only going by the search engine, and obviously, I came up with very few scribes. More knowledgeable people can change the category name. so....(I have (Just)gone back to working on more Egyptian scribes)(and I have actually started on some cuneiform categories for the "documents" made throughout history). I just worked on "Archaeological seals",(actually "Archaeological seal impressions") a subset of the Seal (device). So I am back in history, and prehistory, and would actually like to address the Timeline there.) thanks. (from the HotSonoran ArizonaUSA deserts...Mmcannis (talk) 22:13, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Well....it sounds like it was an easy fix. (Would that the history of the world's subsets were all that easy.) We live in a wonderful time, where people can work as team members. your assistance is much appreciated....////(Michael in the HotSonoranDeserts)...Mmcannis (talk) 23:56, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

S.D.UNGAR

Unfortunately, my effort to post the archive documents on your talk page, or to post a reference in the article failed. The problem is, the documents are in an e-mail form "attach". Do you have another idea how to solve it? Alex —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.245.193.10 (talk) 13:24, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Rabbi Israel Dov Odesser: Please do not discriminate!

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Dear Yoninah: You have categorically deleted and removed all my input from the page Nachman of Breslov, the reason you gave does not pertain to all the damage you did. It is true that I am new to the Wikipedia, so please explain to me if your removal of my clear, basic, and critical corrections is terminal or are they being processed and I will see the required corrections in the near future? If you are not prepared to make the necessary and obvious corrections (to anyone who saw the original hebrew source and was not drawing from some unreliable translation) please remove the original entry - it is disrespectful to Rabbi Nachman!

Please reinstate the reference I supplied to Na Nach Nachma Nachman Meuman - which is a page in the wikipedia itself pertaining to how Rabbi Nachman is understood today!

Please do get back to me, I am waiting to hear from you. Especially you should provide me with sufficient reason to deny the mention of Rabbi Israel Dov Odesser in an article about Rabbi Nachman. Rabbi Israel Dov Odesser OB"M was undisputed as one of the most reliabe, if not the most reliable, bearer of the traditions and ways of Rabbi Nachman, and Rabbi Israel Dov Odesser said: I Am Rabbi Nachman (obviously this needs explanation, but also obvious is that it deserves mention), and created a whole group of chasidim loyal to Rabbi Nachman - is that not relevant to Rabbi Nachman - thousands of followers that claim to have a unique understanding of Rabbi Nachman and who almost exclusively publish all Rabbi Nachman's teachings?!!!!!! Please note that today, 20 Kislev, is the birthday of Rabbi Israel Dov Odesser! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk • contribs) 15:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Breslov

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Jayjg ^(talk) 06:27, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I've left another note on his talk page. He doesn't appear to have edited in a couple of days. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:30, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy Hannukah!

שׂ‎מ‎ח!‎

From Chesdovi

File:Sufganiyah.jpeg

Treesheads

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thank you for your note. I've commented on Treesheads's user Talk page. Jayjg ^(talk) 04:56, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Category:Rabbis of Ohr Somayach

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi Yonina: I have populated the Category:Rabbis of Ohr Somayach with some very famous rabbis who are and have worked as senior lecturers at Ohr Somayach over the decades. Please see my comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 February 14#Category:Rabbis of Ohr Somayach where I have given reasons why the category should be kept and maybe it will help you reconsider. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 08:27, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for the hard work on 'Shlom bayit → Shalom bayit'. Phil_burnstein (talk) 17:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Adherents of Judaism

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There doesn't seem to be much consensus for the Category, at least not where he asked:Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Category:Practicing Jews Proposal. You could take it to CfD. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:57, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: EYAHT

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Yoniah, I trust your judgement, and have less knowledge of Haredi topics than you, so feel free to remove the tag if you don't think it's appropriate. The reason I tagged it, was that when I tried to find geographical coordinates for it, it was incredibly hard to find this school anywhere. It does not appear on any map (even very detailed maps which otherwise show even elementary schools), and the only reason I could find it was because the article specified the address (which I looked up on govmap.gov.il, although it's not labelled there either). A school that doesn't appear in any maps and there's so little to go by when locating it, is difficult to call notable. However, on the other hand, there are plenty of online sources about it, so many it's really as notable as you say. I will leave the judgement to you. Thanks for contacting me about it before removing the tag :) -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 21:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Yochanan Sofer image

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Wow, how'd you do that? The other infoboxes that I checked didn't have that "300px" attached to the image line. Did you tweak something else about the image? Yoninah (talk) 20:12, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Pretty simple :). To display the image i had to place it between backets. Once i did it displayed correctly, but it was so large it filled the entire page. The 300px means that i limited the image size to 300 pixels - which means it is displayed smaller. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 20:54, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Editing Shimon Sofer (II), Erlau & Yochanan Sofer

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello,

Thank you again for your smart and accurate edits. I appreciate you spliting the original article to 3 parts, enabling the expansion of information and accuracy thereof.

In regards to your comments on Shimon Sofer (II) dated 16:36, 8 July 2009 (UTC).

One of the reasons I opened a Wikipedia page on Erlau / Rabbi Yochanan Sofer was due to major disinformation on the web regarding the foundations of the Erlau Kehilla, its phylosophy, customs and history.

I think it is indeed correct to trace the Erlau Dynasty back to the Chassam Sofer for numerous reasons. I would like to note that the Sofer family were not Chassidim. They were a prominent Rabbinical family. In Hungary it was customary to call the Rosh Yeshiva "Rebbe" and in print "Admo"r".

The Chassam Sofer and his Talmidim (such as the Maharam Schick) practiced a pure Ashkenazi Orthodox tradition without the fresh additions of the Mussar and Chassidus movements. These talmidim spread throughout Europe and strenghthened this walk of Judaism which was the norm prior to Chassidism & Yeshivism. Interestingly, there is no name to classify this type of Judaism.

Today, the Ahskenazi Orthodox community has basically been classified into two parts; Chaissidish or Litvish (Lithuaninan). This may be due to the Holocaust wiping out the famous "German-Yeke" or "hungarian" oberland and unterland types which have been almost totally shadowed. There are still many kehilliot around the world identifying themselves with the Chassam Sofer even without their Rabbis being geanologically related.

Rabbi Yochanan Sofer is probably the only direct decendant of the Chassam Sofer today heading a Yeshiva and community. Though he named his yeshiva after Rabbi Shimon Sofer, his lifework has been the presevation and reinstatment of the heritage of the Chassam Sofer and his Talmidim. His community has always been considered as a branch of the Chassam Sofer legacy not only geanologically but fundamentaly. The official motto of the Erlau Dynasty is שלא ייבש המעיין ולא יקצץ האילן פרי עץ חי וקיים which is an excerpt from the Tzavaa-Will of the Chassam Sofer. These words are sung at every Erlau wedding to sybolise this connection. (aporopos, the first Yeshiva in Katamon set up in liberated Syrian Consulate building (pre-1948) was named after Rabi Akiva Eiger).

The מכון חת"ם סופר לכתבי ידות is one of the most important Erlau institutions which preserves the heritage of the Chasam Sofer and ALL of his Talmidim. As well, all the Erlau Sefarim published trace their heritage back to the Chassam Sofer and Rabi Akiva Eiger.

Rabbi Shimon Sofer was born 11 years after the passing of the Chassam Sofer and learned in the Pressburg Yeshiva. His Yeshiva was considered a fundemental branch of his father-grandfathers Yeshiva. Same goes for todays Erlau yeshiva.

Its the same situation with Lubavitch whose founders lived in Liadi and Liozna. It wouldnt be correct to trace Lubavitch to the Tzemach Tzedek or Yeshivat Tomchei Temimim to Rabbi Sholom Dovber Schneersohn (1860–1920) and not to Rabbi Shneur Zalman (Baal Hatanya). Same goes for Satmar with founder who resided in Ujhely.

I hope this justifies and explains why I edited these three articles as such. I intend to open a page for Rabbi Moshe Sofer (II) as well which will close the circle for this Lineage.

I excuse myself for not being fluent with Wikipedia rules, these are my first contributions to Wikipedia. I will indeed look at WP:Referencing for beginners before setting out on my next venture.

Kol Tuv! Pusheter Yid (talk) 19:50, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thank you so much, Yoninah. Did you make the changes to the plural form "gemachs/gemachim?" If so, you missed one. I have no problem with using the Hebrew plural form, but wonder if it might confuse readers who aren't familiar with the language. Another issue I had in dealing with the article is that there are individual entries for several Free Loan Societies and the International Society, but none seem to be particularly well-developed. I did two "redirects" so that someone who types in "Hebrew Free Loan Societies" or "Jewish Free Loan Societies" willb e taken straight to the "Gemach" entry, but I'm wondering if there's a way to better consolidate this whole area. What do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowzalot (talk • contribs) 17:04, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

About your reversion of my 3 edits from yesterday

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

On each of these 3 pages, I turned "Sippurey Ma'asiyyot" (Rabbi Nachman's Stories) into a wikipedia link to its own page, that as I presently write doesn't exist. I also added a brief overview, on each of the 3 pages, to summarise the uniqueness, Torah roots and subsequent influence of Rabbi Nachman's 13 Tales.

Today, I notice you reverted my edits. Wikipedia has really needed a page of its own on the Sippurey Ma'asiyyot. Hasidism is still poorly covered on Wikipedia, and every few months, I have an urgent binge editing session for a few days or weeks! The inner dimensions of Torah in Kabbalah and Hasidic philosophy, are unfortunately not as well known and correctly understood among the wider Jewish world as they deserve, especially in secular circles. Here Wikipedia can help, and discovery of the inner Torah has gratefully awakened many people's Jewish identity (as well as offering many sources of inspiration and spiritual value to the wider non-Jewish world). Good coverage on Wikipedia of all topics in Jewish mysticism can correct some secular stereotypes, such as comparing its proported "irrationalism" with "rational" Jewish philosophy; or the mistranslation of "Contemplative Kabbalah" as "Speculative Kabbalah", mirroring mainstream non-Jewish mysticism, rather than understanding the roots of Kabbalah in Scriptural rules of exegesis. Misunderstandings such as these can lead people to reject Jewish mysticism, and forgo its unique ability to awaken Jewish identity. Where an over-narrow view of secular thought can cause people to reject Judaism, Jewish mysticism can overcome these psychological walls!

The Tales of Rabbi Nachman hold a unique place in Hasidic and Rabbinic literature, while having roots in previous Midrashic, Kabbalistic and Hasidic parable forms. It seems that in them Rabbi Nachman extended the Hasidic parable into a new form, the Kabbalistic fairy tale, without the single, direct analogous meaning of previous Hasidic parables. While I am not a Breslover, though I am Hasidic, I tell Haredi people I meet, who feel opposed to Breslov Hasidus, about the Tales. Its amazing that here a Hasidic Master stood up (sat down?) and told "fairy tales"! And mystical fairy of such imaginary creativity and spiritual depth! When I tell such opposers about the Tales, they are moved by my description, and wonder why their teachers didn't tell them about this! Breslov Hasidus and the Tales, being well known and influential in Yiddish literature, were I think the first thing that got Martin Buber interested in Hasidism. He went on to affect the world's knowledge of the Hasidic movement (though Gershom Scholem criticised his eschewing of Hasidic, Kabbalistic philosophy).

That is why I think Wikipedia really needs its own page on the Tales of Rabbi Nachman. I wonder if you may have been a little too hasty in reverting my edits of yesterday! Maybe you would be right if you thought that on each of these 3 pages, my description of the Sippurey Ma'asiyyot was a little too long for its context in the lists of Breslov works. Nonetheless, I would argue that the uniqueness of the Tales, and their relative unfamiliarity compared with their spiritual potential, would support my hilighting their nature in the way I did. I tried to keep my descritions to a minimum few lines, while covering all the contours of the topic: uniqueness in Hasidism and general Rabbinic literature, roots, and cultural impact.

Perhaps you reverted my edits because no Wikipedia page yet exists on the Sippurey Ma'asiyyot, while I had made the title into a link like this on each of the 3 pages! If that is the reason, then give me a chance! I planned to start a new page on the Tales today, though have now been delayed for an hour and a half! I'm not the most qualified person to begin the page, but as no one else did so, I have wanted for over a year to find the time to write the page! So here goes... If you like the page, or reconsider your reversions, you might decide to reinstate my edits to the 3 pages, or perhaps reinstate them with some reduction to the (fairly moderate considering the justified uniqueness of the Tales) length of my descriptions, or at the very least, reinstate the Sippurey Ma'asiyyot wikipedia links! Also, if you read this as soon as I have written it, don't do anything connected with it for the rest of the day, so that I get the chance to write the Tales page!

I tend to avoid reverting edits by others as much as possible, though that could be because I'm fairly new to Wikipedia, and I see that you have done much wonderful, dedicated and good work on the Breslov pages. Thanks very much for that! If you would like to extend your abilites to further develop the many other pages on Kabbalah and Hasidism, then I, for one, would be most grateful, and some of the extra responsibility would be removed from me, especially as I have many other big things going on in my life, and regrettably too little time to edit Wikipedia! With lots of success and my gratitude! 217.42.22.154 (talk) 17:51, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

As I was writing the above, Wikipedia logged me out. I'm now logged back in, with the same account with which I edited yesterday's Breslov pages. If you wish to reply to me, don't do so at the above computer code talk page (internet cafe). Rather go to my Talk page at April8. Thanks! April8 (talk) 17:58, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Extra P.S. message From April8

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I've noticed that you gave a reason in shorthand notation for your reversals of my 3 Breslov pages' edits of yesterday ("Delete POV, OR and overlinking"). Read the above long post of mine, and consider if those reasons would justify removing my edit additions, compared to the strength of the above justifications for their inclusion (on the 3 pages: Breslov (Hasidic dynasty), Nachman of Breslov and Nathan of Breslov).

If the reason was different from POV, OR and overlinking, such as too long descriptions for the list context, or overemphasis on the Tales while the more important works are unellaborated here, then your reversions would perhaps be understandable (though for the above reasons, I think, incorrect). However, I don't think POV, OR and overlinking would justify your reversions. Instead, if they are the reasons, you should have added "citation needed" (^{[citation needed]}) remarks into the wording of mine. My points are broadly correct, and not controversial or new research. A familiarity with Midrashic, Kabbalistic and Hasidic parables reveals to any observer the roots, and also the uniqueness of Rabbi Nachman's Tales. The influence of the Tales on subsequent secular Yiddish literature is well known: yesterday I also added edits to that page, in preparation for beggining the page on the Tales themselves, but the history of that page shows that it already mentioned the (unique) influence of the Tales (more than other Hasidic storytelling forms) on susequent Yiddish literature, before I edited the page. If you want literary critical evidence for the influence of the Tales on later secular writers, see the book A Bridge of Longing: The Lost Art of Yiddish Storytelling, by David G. Roskies, Harvard University Press. The book begins with the only religious Yiddish writer it covers: Rabbi Nachman and his Tales. It analyses the Tales based firstly on the traditional "Pardes" method of Jewish exegesis, then based on literary and biographical inverstigation of the meaning of storytelling to Rabbi Nachman. Therefore, I don't think POV, OR, or even (considering the significance of the Tales) overlinking would justify your reversions of my edits. Rather only, at most, inserting "citation needed" (Roskies book!) comments into my text would be called for, if these are the reasons for your reversions.

I hope you notice this extra P.S. message, and reply to me at April8 Talk page. I hope after all this time that I now have time to start the Sippurey Ma'asiyyot page! Consider carefully my points of both posts, and I await your reply! From a very sincere, but flustered editor! If you wish to help me in other matters, I think 2 different pages on general Hasidic Stories (hagiographic stories of Rebbes: Hasidism gave such storytelling a unique new prominence in dveikus and Judaism. The importance and difficiencies if Martin Buber's translations should be discussed. For analysis of this see Feeding amongst the Lilies: A Wellsprings reader distributed through Kehot website) and general Hasidic Parables (see book The Hasidic Parable cited on Hasidic philosophy page) are urgently needed on Wikipedia, but I shan't have the time to make them any time soon. Best wishes April8 (talk) 19:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Last P.S. Points!

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You are right that the Tales don't form the greatest section and backbone of Rabbi Nachman's Torah, but my point, behind the argument for inclusion of my edits of yesterday, is that amongst the (secular) World, this viewpoint is reversed. They can appreciate the unique greatness of the Tales, even though Kabbalah and Hasidic philosophy (Likkutei Moharan) are unknown or innaccessable to them. Therefore the short descriptions I put about the Tales on the 3 Pages are neccessary in principle, and I tried to cover the full contours of the subject as concisely as possible. As I think Rabbi Nachman said "no one could object, because they are just stories". I think that Rabbi Nachman's claim to have affected the Maskilim he was friendly with in Uman (?) and of his light shining till Mashiach, applies in some (secular) circles precisely and mainly through the Tales, which can reach those for whom all other avenues are closed. This explains the reason for my 3 edits.

N.B. The full details of the other books I mentioned above, listed on Hasidic philosophy page are: 1. For an analysis of the spiritual difference between Buber's translations of the traditional Hasidic stories and the originals, see the article in the Wellsprings magazine reader, collected in the book Feeding Among the Lilies: The Wellsprings Reader, selected essays edited by Baila Olidort, published by Wellsprings Journal, distributed through Kehot Publication Society. 2. The Hasidic Parable, Aryeh Wineman, Jewish Publication Society. Hasidic thought gave new life to the traditional Jewish medium of using parables to explain ideas. Hasidic parables make the mystical ideas tangible, in keeping with the emphasis in Hasidism to transform Jewish mysticism from abstract theology to personal fervour. April8 (talk) 20:00, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Just read your reply posts

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The above P.S. comments desribe the sources for the influence of the Tales on subsequent Yiddish literature. Lack of references in the short sentences I wrote would not justify deletion, but rather modification of my words with "citation needed" inserts.

My point about calling them "fairy tales" is academically valid. I am familiar with the deep commentaries on the Tales collected in Aryeh Kaplan's book, and of course in Breslav Hasidus they are treated like Ruach-Hakodesh Torah to study and meditate on, and certainly not as fairy tales. Nonetheless superficially, the literary form Rabbi Nachman used was the fairy tale genre. I think I specifically delinneated this difference yesterday on the Yiddish literature page, with the word "superficially" fairy tales. Academic descriptions of them call them fairy tales, as that is the genre. Good academic discussion of them then proceeds to overturn this description from a deep understanding of their inner depths and commentary. An encyclopedia like Wikipedia needs to start without our prior belief in Divine revelation, and if we like, deep evidence for Divine revelation can then be constructed through academic arguement.

The Roskies book does precisely this by applying pshat, remez, drush and sod methods to the Tales. This arguement can subsequently be used, and would be the way to reach sceptics to believe in Divine revelation.

My point, also discussed by Roskies, is that the Tales begin from roots in previous Midrashic, Kabbalistic and Hasidic parable forms, but then make a unique "quantum leap" ahead into an entirely new genre. That explains why I also described them in my 3 short overviews as "unique in Hasidic and general Rabbinic literature". I think I also precisely explained this unique conceptual advance and difference on the Yiddish literature page. It is precisely because the Tales begin from earlier mystical parable roots, but then become entirely novel, that I so want to explain their uniqueness on Wikipedia. As for the roots, consider: The unique advance of the Tales could only have been created by the mystical genius of Rabbi Nachman, because of the general atmosphere in Judaism, Kabbalah, and especially Hasidism, of telling proto-fairy tale characterised genres of parable. When the Baal Shem Tov explained the meaning of the shofar through the parable of the King's lost son (which I put on Yiddish literature yesterday), then this gave Rabbi Nachman the weltanschauung (zeitgeist) environment to take the storytelling form of Kings and Princes further into his uniquely new development. And no one since Rabbi Nachman has created anything similar.

Again, while your "citation needed" points or arguements with the 3 short summary wordings I used have validity, so much more is lost by your deleting my 3 edits, than would be gained by adjusting the words I used to your exact preference. Correction - the further development of sincere edits by subtle adjustments, is usually better than deletion. Now the important 3 few descriptive sentances about the Tales on the 3 pages is missing, so the pages are lacking what they do need. Because of the unique reach of the Tales to secular sceptics, the brief descriptions of their meanings need to be put on the 3 pages. If you like, you could have added the all important extra word "superficially appearing in a fairy tale genre, but understood by devotees quite the opposite." It was Rabbi Nachman's (and earlier Kabbalistic writers') genius to turn proto-fairy tale forms into Divine Revelation. Consider: The Song of Songs is a romantic love story genre, but it is precisely through such manipulatively imaginative and essentially deep thoughts and feelings that the Divine secrets of Creation can be described - and precisely only through such low mediums. My 3 descriptions, with if you correctly like, your adjustments, would have filled a crucial gap on the 3 pages! Again, you could also adjust what I wrote on the Yiddish literature page, to further emphasise the unique advance of genre of the Tales, and the inner rejection of them as fairy tales (though if I remember correctly, I did make these points, perhaps a little too subtly!). Just don't go erasing my edit on the Yiddish literature page! Modification is infinitely better in this sincere case than en-mass deletion/wipe out/slaughter! No time left Internet cafe closing NOW! Must dash. Consider well my points, from a Hasidic believer in Torah miSinai, Ruach Hakodesh and Tzaddikism! April8 (talk) 20:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for 2nd reply

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello Yoninah! Sorry if my tone in the previous posts was a bit intemperate! You make good objections! Also, sorry for filling out your talk page with reams of correspondence! I'll try to be more concise (not my greatest talent!). Wishing to improve the page on Hasidic philosophy earlier this year, I wrote the long list and descriptions of books on that page. Don't be mislead! I'm about the least qualified person in the World to try to improve Kabbalah and Hasidus on Wikipedia. It's just that no one else (apart from specialised areas like Breslov) is doing it extensively, so I feel I have to! (Though the person who brilliantly listed all the Rebbes and Hasidic dynasties was not me!) I've bought masses of books on Hasidus and other topics, including many of the list I gave - but I havn't read them yet (that's the hard bit!), apart from some chapters. I long to read them (by now you might realise that longing for the transcendent, in all its religious and secular forms, is the main expression of my personality), but have had so many personal (psychological and physical) problems (related to the longing - too much light, too weak vessels - "Tohu" in Kabbalah), that I have so far been prevented from proper study. It'll be a life-long goal for me to improve Wikipedia!

I'm now preparing for a long time when, because of upcoming problems, I'll probably be unable to edit Wikipedia. I began editing, only intermittently, since January of last year. I'm now urgently trying to cram in as much improvement as possible in these few weeks, before my long break! That explains why I was looking for someone else to write the 2 new pages on (general) Hasidic stories (of Rebbes etc.) and (general) Hasidic parables (apart from Rabbi Nachman's Tales). If you can't do it, perhaps you know someone else in the Wikipedia editing community who can (see my last 4 posts for advice of content and essential reference books). A lot of the edits I did till now were anonymously made using different internet cafe computer codes. One advantage of this is that it helps to conceal the few, biased, embarassing, bad edits I've left for others to improve! (Still, they did temporarily fill some gaps on undeveloped pages, and hopefully provoke a better improvement from others!) I'm glad to say that my editing abilities have been improving exponentially, so I'll never allow myself to do a bad edit again! Fortunately, Ive also done lots of good edits!

I intend to do the Rabbi Nachman Tales page next week, and I'll contact you when it's done. In the mean time, you might be interested in the coppied correspondence I wrote to someone else on my Talk page. I know Breslovers are strict not to hear impure music, but I can't live without some, carefully selected forms of it (used l'shem shamayim for my particular spiritual needs). At least "Classical" tradition music, my favourite everyday type of music (niggunim are for holy moments of deveikus), is much more elevated and inward than external, "Popular" tradition music (though the popular music I like is very selective, and tends to be a more refined and transcendent type). The P.S. of the post on my Talk page describes my favourite "Classical" (see Classical music#Timeline of composers) composers. I'm reluctant to choose one favourite, but Mahler (the greatest Jewish composer!) is the one I can't so far live without. See the section Mahler#legacy, which I contributed to (if it's still there!). He's the composer I need most for serving G-d, because he's the greatest mystic in "Classical" music. He yearns (like me!) for the transcendent, and unlike niggunim, he deals with the suffering of the search! Some call him a mystic, unable to find the (musical) answers (he was Jewishly non-observant, but spiritual). For someone like me who is certain of Divinity, rather, his music captures the exile of this World from God. His music is perhaps the most autobiographical of any composer, as he turned his own life into mystical art. The events of his last years make his last 3 pieces successively: a farewell (the greatest in "Classical" music), a despair and resignation, and finally a serenity and acceptance of his life. As a young boy, he wanted to be "a martyr"! Those who don't like his music ("people who prefer manliness to anguish") see his music as too neurotic: "he enjoys the suffering" of mystical martydom. Many others, like me, need Mahler to express the mystical suffering and longing for G-d of life. He "inspires perhaps the most frenzied following of any composer" (quotes from Harold Schonberg book Lives of the Great Composers-the best book on "Classical" tradition music. Informative, humerous, fun and opinionated! Schonberg is a Mahler detractor, but gives him credit!). "Soul states, inner crises, ecstacy, transfiguration". See also some of the other composers on my Talk page P.S. that I love.

From my self-introspective examination:

Type of music:	Spiritual psychology:
Niggunim	Holy feelings of Jewish G-dly soul (no impurity). Divine transcendence
"Classical"	Aesthtic inner beauty feelings (impurity slight. Some composers, like Wagner, more impure. Many others much closer to spirituality, and able to be absorbed into holiness. Abundant delight and profound depth of thought and feeling can be found with knowledgable select searching-the unlearned public folk don't usually know about some of the greatest composers of musical genius who can be less well known. Different Eras: Early, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, Modern, Postmodern. My favourite is late Romantic to Modern, though all eras have unique things to offer). Divine immanence in Nature, once occasional impurity separated
selective "Popular"	Outer psychological feelings and strength (greater impurity, that would need to be sublimated-interpretated carefully, if one tried to use it l'shem shamayim. But select quality musicians have potential for careful contribution of strength-for some people only-in serving G-d. Great diversity of styles and performers in different "Popular" forms, from completely impure-and bad art!-to much better and much closer to spiritual elevation). Experience of outer self

Sorry - this is another long post! With best wishes April8 (talk) 21:49, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Sha'ar Hashomayim

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Just dropping by to say thank you for adding a photo of the yeshiva building. Joe407 (talk) 05:06, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello Yoninah!

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

From April8. How are you doing? I have spent a long time recently, seeking to improve the Kabbalah and Hasidic pages and anything that positions them in wider Jewish theology and philosophy, and must shortly stop to do other things! As my life is presently an organised chaos, I don't know when I'll have another editing session! So, I won't have time to start a new page on Sippurei Maasiot. In this editing session, I became more ambitious than at the start, and realised that there were more urgent tasks to do. So, sorry. And also I'm really sorry if I was a bit argumentative earlier - I didn't mean to be, but may have come across like that, because of the chaos/pressure!

In the forseable future, if you should start the new page on Rabbi Nachman's Tales, then, perhaps here are some suggestive ideas from me: On the Template:Kabbalah I made a link to Aggadah, to show one historical context for Kabbalistic exegesis. As Rabbi Nachman said that "the parable manner of his tales was the way Kabbalah was taught before Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai explained it directly in the Zohar", then Aggadah has a special connection to his Tales. The page on Aggadah explains the mystical secrets concealed in parable form within them. I suggest that any page on the Sippurei Maasiot should begin with an introductory section giving the historical context in Judaism of utilising parables to give over Jewish mysticism. In the written Oral Torah, the first example we have is Aggadot. The paragraph could be headed with a link to that page for further information:

Then the paragraph could mention parables in Kabbalah. On the page Yiddish literature#Hasidic and Haskalah literature I added a picture that gives an example from Kabbalah of this, with reference to the Sippurei Maasiot. The relevance of Lurianic Kabbalah redemption of "sparks of holiness" could be mentioned, with reference to non-Jewish tales. This would be able to mention the "fairy tale" form of non-Jewish stories, without incorrectly calling the Sippurei Maasiot "fairy tales". From the perspective of Torah and truth, they are of course not fairy tales, as the opposite is true - They are Kabbalistic parables, and secular fairy tales have hidden Kabbalistic parables confused within them! Nonetheless, this would be able to mention the superficially "fairy tale" similarity of Rabbi Nachman's Tales, without mistakenly calling them such. I have only described them as "fairy tales" on occasions, when I felt that it could wake up a Hasidic spark in the non-Hasidic person I was speaking to. For example, a Litvish person may have an overly narrow view of what constitutes Torah study and valuable spirituality, and when I mentioned the Sippurei Maasiot as "fairy tales", it was only to broaden their spiritual horizons! The paragraph could quote the saying of Rabbi Nachman that "the tales of the world have hidden holiness confused within them ,out of order", and describe the special ability and Messianic life of Rabbi Nachman in seeking cosmic Tikkun. This would clarify any superficial resemblence of the Tales to fairy tale form.

The introduction could then look at pre-Breslov Hasidic parables of the Baal Shem Tov and other Rebbes, and by comparison explain the uniqueness of the Sippurei Maasiot. Finally, their subsequent influence on Yiddish literature could be mentioned. After this, the page could list the names of the 13 main Tales, and the names of smaller stories of Rabbi Nachman. Ideally a short description of each Tale should be given, but anyway, the bottom of the page should give the external link to an English Sippurei Maasiot website.

These suggestions are only if you have time yourself to begin the page, as I shan't have any such time soon!

I've put up a metaphorical, hopefully inspirational picture describing the Sippurei Maasiot, and wider Breslov Hasidus on Hasidic philosophy. I've also put a hopefully inspirational, descriptively intuitive picture of Hisbodedus on Jewish meditation. Also a picture connecting Uman to Teshuva deveikus on Deveikut. I hope you like them! What I would love would be to have an image of Rabbi Nachman's holy chair with its carvings, on the Breslov pages. Look at the copyright permission on this:
40px|
If no wider justification of putting an image of his chair on Wikimedia commons can be found, then perhaps, as a last resort, the image of the chair from a book cover could be pasted, with cropped removal of text! This book "Tzaddik" on Amazon has a partial image! or from a website This site has a fuller image!

N.B. For an explanation of Hasidic popular descriptive lore of three paths in Hasidism: "Hasidic book of the wicked"-Likkutei Moharan, "Hasidic book of the intermediate"-Tanya, "Hasidic book of the righteous"-Noam Elimelech, I put a description on Dov Ber of Mezeritch and a reference citation on Elimelech of Lizhensk.
P.S.

Is User:Yoninah short for commons:File:Rabbi Yonassan Gershom 2008.jpg, the famous contributer to Amazon book reviews?
I highly recommend the book I mentioned earlier, for autobiographical background on the Sippurei Maasiot - cited on books section of Hasidic philosophy: A Bridge of Longing-The lost art of yiddish storytelling by Roskies. It is informative and valuable!
Once again, my apology if I was a bit argumentative earlier! Its the only time I have pursued a wikipedia thread like that, and it won't happen again! Our correspondence motivated me to make a special new User:April8 page, to offer an overview of the things I like, partly as an apology, and partly to offer inspiration to anyone. Eg. "Classical" tradition music, and its wider context in a personal psychology and philosophical-spiritual approach to life. Don't forget to have a look at it! (not quite finished yet)

With Best Wishes. This post is from User:April8, but the computer has logged me out as I wrote it. This internet cafe is just about to close, so I'll change the signature to User talk:April8 in a few minutes. This computer is a random one in a local internet cafe, and not a user talk page I would wish to reply on! ~I've also just made a tiny title change to my previous posts above, by removing a "=Title=" from their headings (3= to 2=), so as to remove their prominent indentation in the contents box. I don't want to draw attention to their embarrassing style of debate! Also, similarly shortened the first title for the same reason! Don't worry though: the posts are unchanged! Corrected signature: April8 (talk) 22:57, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Rights

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello. Rollback is explained at Wikipedia:Rollback feature and autoreview at Wikipedia:Autoreviewer. I've looked at your content, and even though you do not have 75 non-redirect created pages, I'm pretty certain you are only adding good material when you create a page. Enjoy! -- Avi (talk) 20:03, 1 December 2009 (UTC)