This is an archive of past discussions. 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 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 |
The book was from a library and I read it long back that's why I didn't know a lot about the details of the book. Could you please remove the 1st picture on your user page(it's a bit disturbing because of the word in it). Amaan.S ( talk) 11:52, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
It explicitly does not compare Jews to Nazis. It rejects Nazis who claim to speak for Palestinian rights. And no, I have not been sanctioned by Sandstein for the use of these, or other, images. RolandR ( talk) 09:05, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Whatever the case may be, there are people on Wikipedia who do not prefer such abusive words Amaan.S ( talk) 21:46, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
I've opened an arbitration enforcement request relating to you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#RolandR. Chess (talk) Ping when replying 03:14, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 38, January – April 2020
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:58, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 39, May – June 2020
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:13, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I can see that you are an experienced editor, both in term of duration and quantity. Can I mention WP:SUMMARYNO ‘Avoid vagueness’ (in edit summaries) and WP:REVEXP ‘Edit summaries, always a good practice, are particularly important when reverting. Provide a valid and informative explanation including, if possible, a link to the Wikipedia principle you believe justifies the reversion.’ Obviously, there are good reasons for these policies: for example, they save everyone time and reduce edit warring. I mention these policies as it seems to me that you have not followed them sufficiently well in this instance. In your reversion of my edit, you have said merely that the article should be in the category, whereas I have explained exactly why I think it should not be. As your “main area of knowledge and interest is…Jewish matters” you presumably have some specific reasons for rejecting my assertions that “Anti-Judaism” concerns criticism of the religion and Atzmon has said that he does not criticize the religion and that, therefore, the article should not be in Anti-Judaism. I should add that he has said this several times, in interviews and print, and I do not see attacks by him on the religion in the article. He says that “Jewishness is the belief that the Jews are somehow special, chosen, privileged and should enjoy and celebrate their privilege. Not all Jews subscribe to this idea, but many of them do.” This and other aspects of Jewish political culture which he critiques may well have religious roots but is not reliant on religious belief. His critique is thus not limited to Zionism, but surely that does not mean he has to be put in an inappropriate anti-religious category, simply because there is not a better one. Will you tell me why you think the category is appropriate for the article? Thank you. Jontel ( talk) 13:08, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Moreover, the full definition from its article seems to be that Anti-Judaism is limited to those with alternative religious beliefs, which is not true of Atzmon, who is an atheist. 'Anti-Judaism is the "total or partial opposition to Judaism as a religion—and the total or partial opposition to Jews as adherents of it—by persons who accept a competing system of beliefs and practices and consider certain genuine Judaic beliefs and practices inferior."[1]' Jontel ( talk) 13:42, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
I note that you reverted my edit within three minutes of it being made, so not a lot of time for reflection and research. Perhaps, after further consideration of the issue, you could just self-revert. Jontel ( talk) 07:45, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi there! I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted my fix to Leninism.
If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both <ref name="foo">...</ref>
and one or more <ref name="foo"/>
referring to it. Someone then removed the <ref name="foo">...</ref>
but left the <ref name="foo"/>
, which results in a big red error in the article. I replaced one of the remaining <ref name="foo"/>
with a copy of the <ref name="foo">...</ref>
; I did not re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the remaining instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove all instances of the named reference so as to not leave any big red error.
If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at
User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at
User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks!
AnomieBOT
⚡ 22:10, 27 June 2020 (UTC) If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{
bots|optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}}
to your talk page.
my edits on the human implant page point out that the study incorrectly states that data storage and security of that data is impossible both are incorrect. I currently have a flex df2 implant in my hand that contains 8kb of storage I can use to my liking this is also protected by an aes key to provide security. Can you please bother to look at the information before reverting changes you simply don't agree with? Devilclarke ( talk) 00:05, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:15, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:26, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
I am back, my friend. And wish you שנה טובה! Look forward to working together to rid the world of bigotry and Capitalism. ابو علي (Abu Ali) ( talk) 06:34, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
User:RolandR/Userboxes/Anti-Zionist, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:RolandR/Userboxes/Anti-Zionist and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:RolandR/Userboxes/Anti-Zionist during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. — Naddruf ( talk ~ contribs) 15:27, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 41, September – October 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:48, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
"Repeatedly and exhaustively discussed" where? Reviewing WP's actual content, it is very, very mixed on this question, as is real-world content, and WP:MOS says nothing about the matter anywhere. Nor has there ever been an RfC on this question at WT:MOS or similar venues (though I see many short discussions, usually with input from 3–10 editors, and with no formal WP:CLOSEs). The ADL uses "anti-Semit[ism|itic|ite]", though not with 100% conformity. I make antisem* to anti-Sem* changes frequently, and this is the first time I recall being reverted on it, much less with such dismissive "certainty". The reason I make this change is that Semite is a proper noun, and WP, like most publishers, capitalizes proper names in derived (e.g. adjectival and combining-form) usage, except in usual cases (typically when the term is idiom that has lost all connection to its original context, e.g. "their platonic relationship", "complaints of draconian policies at their workplace"). Because this is a frequently used proper name (usually in derivational forms), switching to fused-compound lower-case usage produces jarring results, e.g. "Semitic peoples ... antisemites" within a few clauses or sentences of each other. Finally, because it is a proper name, lower-casing it is guaranteed to be offensive to some subset of readers, for no actual encyclopedic clarity gain (actually a loss in that regard), while writing "anti-Semite" is offensive to no one, ever, just is not the exact preference of some unusually anti-hyphen people. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 19:47, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
PS: Google n-grams clearly show that the anti-Sem* forms are dominant, in all cases, over the antisem* forms. [1] Other digging around, like comparing relative frequency in news vs. journal and book sources, demonstrates that the antisem* forms are primarily a product of journalistic writing and the news-style guides behind it (AP Stylebook, the Guardian and Observer style guide [ sic], etc.). But WP is not written in news style as a matter of clear policy. This appears over-due for a site-wide RfC, the conclusion of which I firmly predict will be to use the anti-Sem* forms. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 20:12, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
[2] Zero talk 21:15, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Please feel free to check my talk page for the reply I sent you. DarkMatterMan4500 ( talk) 14:28, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I saw you reverted my request on requests for arbitration enforcement and thought it might be helpful to talk directly. My understanding was that administrators could put restrictions on individual pages under discussion, and that this was the place to request page restrictions. Benevolent human ( talk) 01:34, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Roland, you are not an Arb or a clerk. Please do not clerk AE. Primefac ( talk) 01:53, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 42, November – December 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
The elevating quality of the Carlos Latuff quote on your user page is diminished considerably when one realizes that a large number of people consider Carlos Latuff himself to be a bigoted hater of Jews -- even the UK Guardian newspaper: [4]. No one has ever been able to offer me any valid reason for the presence of side-curls in File:Cry-wolf.png other than Latuff's personal hatred of the Jewish religion, and that's one of the more moderate examples... AnonMoos ( talk) 01:13, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
hello you revert my edit [ [5]] can i edit this page if i edit more than 500? Ax777 ( talk) 14:16, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, nobody needs to know that you are part of an Arab nationalist campaign and that therefore you have a bias. It is also completely not appropriate to deny the antisemitism of the Palestinian movement and of its terror groups, and I hope you can put a message condemning the antisemitc comments of Husseini and of Palestinian group's leaders. I won't give you blank check to whitewash history, and stand by like a judenrat. No Jews has to feel offended on Wikipedia by any propaganda. I don't talk about jewhatred on my profile, nobody does. Check yourself twice. Thank you for your understanding. -- Vanlister ( talk) 18:58, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Quoting you : those racist Jews. -- Vanlister ( talk) 19:17, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Those Jews-- Vanlister ( talk) 20:46, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 42, January – February 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
WP:ONUS is clear, if additions are reverted make a case at talk, do not re-add them. Slatersteven ( talk) 11:30, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
I assume that this comment is directed at the person whose comment I removed and not at me, since I have not re-added anything. RolandR ( talk) 15:13, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 43, March – April 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 45, May – June 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:04, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
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, and I would be answer any questions and receive any feedback from you.
Sarah Sanbar
Sarabnas I'm researching Wikipedia Questions? 10:08, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 46, July – August 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:15, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 47, September – October 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:59, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 48, November – December 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:13, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 49, January – February 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:06, 25 March 2022 (UTC)