User talk:Chesdovi/Archive 1

Bruchim Haboim
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Come join us at WP:ORBCW. - CrazyRussian talk/email 11:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Tiferesyisrael48.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Tiferesyisrael48.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 15:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Jospeh Karo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Jospeh Karo.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 14:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: "Rivial claims" section of Al-Aqsa Mosque article
I am writing in an advocacy capacity for User:Thestick's concerns with the "Rival claims" section of this article. I respectfully request you to provide a statement here User:Amerique/AMA as to how you feel this this section fits within WP:NPOV, WP:VERIFY and WP:What_Wikipedia_is_not. Our aim is to resolve this dispute civilly and entirely within the bounds of WP:FAITH. I appreciate your time. Thank you, --Amerique 04:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Almorso has added a statement to the page above. Please consider adding a statement so we can try to resolve this situation without taking it further up the WP:DR process. Thank you,--Amerique 04:34, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Even Hashtiya
Your recent additions to the article were magnificent.... btw I wondered if you saw the recent "development" with Uri Ariel ? Amoruso 14:08, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Your help is badly needed to improve the article Moriah. Amoruso 05:42, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Questionable
I am glad you like it, you may be happy to know it is not yet complete. I have only used half of the material on the source so far. --Shamir1 21:09, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Temple Mount - recent events
''Could you just give the reason why it was deleted? Thanks! Chesdovi 11:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)''
 * Sorry - I thought I was making a much smaller edit, but was mistakenly editting an earlier version of the page. I have put everything back. --Eliyak T · C 23:05, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

if someone changes links
It's possible simply to go back to an early version and copy paste the original links, n'est pas? Amoruso 19:12, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Your edit in 1929 Hebron massacre
Hi Dovid, I am wondering whether it was your intention to leave JAZ link and Kaplan's story there. I tried to explain at talk why I do not believe they belong there. Thanks. ←Humus sapiens ну? 03:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Third holiest site suggestion
Chesdovi, I think that you're correct that the article should stay, but wanted to offer what I hope you'll take as constructive criticism. Thanks, and let me know if I can help, TheronJ 14:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that accusing muslim editors of being biased because they are muslim won't help the argument, any more than the regular accusations against pro-Israel, pro-Catholic, etc., editors ever help. First, it just makes everyone mad, and it never convinces anyone.  You can respond to editors on the merits of their arguments, and if you're right, you will usually win, but arguing that  Second, it might be construed as a personal attack, which will be one strike against the "keep the article" side if this ever ends up in arbitration.  Third, it's not, IMHO, really fair.  Striver is the only "delete the article" editor with whom I have had much prior experience, but he/she is clearly not in some doctrinal lockstep - he voted to keep twice, then changed the second keep to a delete.
 * More specifically, I suggest that you delete this edit - it won't do any good, and it may end up further inflaming the debate.
 * I was actually replying to (→Netscott) not stirver, but point accepted, Thanks. Chesdovi 15:14, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Shalom
I saw your excellent creation Kathiraveli_November_2006_massacre. It was a timely creation unfortunately someelse had also created Vaharai bombing about the same incident. Please do what ever you want with these 2 articles to merge them together. Thanks for your interest.RaveenS 19:02, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Vaharai
I don't understand Which article are you talking about? Sudharsansn (talk • contribs) 14:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Vaharai is what we have heard in the papers, we also saw Kathiraveli as the village within the Vaharai division. Hope this calrifies. It is a village within a municipality. Thanks RaveenS 16:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


 * After you merge an article all what you have to do is simply redirect it to the new merged article, no need to delete. ThanksRaveenS 16:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Protected articles
I know you aren't very chatty, but since the THS and Aqsa Mosque articles are protected now how about we discuss and set aside any differences and reach a consensus on several issues including how to wikilink to the article. Regards - thestick 04:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Noahide
Hi, please join in the discussion on the Noahide Laws talk page about cleaning it up etc. Thanks! Chavatshimshon 08:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Olomouc 2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Olomouc 2.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 06:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Olomouc_1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Olomouc_1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 08:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Holiest sites in Islam article
Having fun? thestick 11:36, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Please don't vandalize the article. thestick 12:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Last warning
This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --  Szvest   -  Wiki me up ®  14:39, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

48 hour block
You have been blocked from editing for disruption to Holiest sites in Islam after final warning. Durova Charg e! 08:51, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Help requested!
Would someone please contact User:Durova for me and ask for it to respond to the unanswered e-mails I have sent. How much longer am I supposed to wait?! Cheers!


 * If you sent e-mails then he got them. Your block is 48 hours from 00:50, December 19, 2006, you need to wait until 00:50, December 21, 2006. If you are contesting your block use the template. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 16:59, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much HighInBC. I didn't want to use it until I had used the advised option of sending an e-mail to the cause of the blockage. As I got no response, I will now have to resort to the next step. How unhelpful of User:Durova! Chesdovi 17:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Please check the time of the warning and my additions after that. You will hopefully see that all the additions are legitimate. There was no reason to be blocked. This is unjust! Please provide a link to the disruption bit. Chesdovi 17:25, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


 * In short, continueing to add material that consensus is against is a form of disruption, consensus is how we determine content. If you disagree I invite you to ask another admin with the again, but I think the answer will be very similiar. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 17:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

There was no chance to discuss whether these sites were a consensus. Reliable sources where provided and Muslim editors, except ALM who wanted the page deleted and who I have reported for blindly deleting time and time again with no good reason, have left the material. I have worked on this page since it’s inception and when the page name was changed a day or two before, it gave rise to the need for addition of more sites. If you will not reconsider I will request this is looked into again. Thank you for your help so far, much appreciated! Chesdovi 17:51, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I appreciate your polite attitude. I have replaced my response with your original request for unblock and let another admin decide, I still feal the same, but another admin may see differently. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 17:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Please can someone notify an administrator I am awaiting their help. Many thanks! Chesdovi 22:44, 19 December 2006 (UTC) Hello, you used the tag to request unblocking, but that tag is generally more appropriate for questions regarding how to use, browse, or edit Wikipedia. Don't worry, the template is enough to get your block reviewed. Administrators will be able to find your page and review the circumstances of your block, even if it has been reviewed already. You can also discuss the situation with the blocking administrator over email, or find other administrators to email here. You can also join a Wikipedia IRC channel or use the unblock-en-l mailing list to request unblocking. Please bear in mind that most of the users responding to helpme requests are not administrators. Thank you, and good luck.

-- lucasbfr talk 00:32, 20 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Chesdovi sent me three e-mails in swift succession and now uses them as grounds for a block appeal. The time stamp for the final warning is 14:38, 18 December 2006.  Exactly twenty minutes later this editor added a comment about a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant to Holiest sites in Islam.  The statement, although sourced, was unencyclopedic and had been inserted and reverted before.  Then at 17:08 18 December he started a thread on WP:ANI accusing another editor of vandalism - actually the other editor had been reverting his damage.  As the thread demonstrates Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents, his examples of "vandalism" were nonsense.  Among other things they demonstrated that Chesdovi had tried to call Neuschwanstein Castle in Germany one of Islam's holiest sites.  The other editor had simply been cleaning up the mess.  Blocking is a very clear-cut decision in this case.  Durova Charg e!  14:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

++++++

“…this editor added a comment about a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant to Holiest sites in Islam. The statement, although sourced, was unencyclopedic and had been inserted and reverted before.”


 * This may have been unencyclopedic according to you as it stood, but worded properly together with it's existing source, would be totally acceptable in reference to the haji pilgrimage. It is a very weak reason in MHO for someone to be blocked b/c of an addition like this! That it was reverted before by User:ALM scientist isn’t an excuse. He is a prolific “deleter” of legitimate content. This addition was not noted by him for discussion on the talk page before he deleted it. I intend to re-add this information when I am unblocked and then we will see if it constitutes disruption. If there was a dilemma with it’s addition the usual course of action should have been taken, why blockage?!

“Then at 17:08 18 December he started a thread on WP:ANI accusing another editor of vandalism - actually the other editor had been reverting his damage. As the thread demonstrates Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents, his examples of "vandalism" were nonsense.”


 * I don’t understand this, User:ALM scientist deleted twice legitimate information saying it was “insignificant” yet it still remains on the page! It is significant and he just went ahead and deleted it: Why did User:ALM scientist delete this? and this? If that isn’t vandalism, what is?! User:Durova is calling User:ALM scientist’s unjustified deletion as an “editor [who] had simply been cleaning up the mess”.  It was User:Thestick who had removed Neuschwanstein Castle not User:ALM scientist, therefore I was justified to report him. The need for additional sites arose after the name of the page was changed a few days ago, a fact I don't think User:Durova was aware of at the time it blocked me.

I also find objectionable the decision of User:Durova to reply to my messages only after I wrote that I may take action against him/her for abusing his/her position as an administrator, for blocking me in error, not responding to my e-mails and being unhelpful. I also find it hard to swallow the fact s/he wrote that s/he would have “gladly have made it longer” as if I had continued to cause problems after my final & only warning from an administrator. I feel humiliated and feel my reputation has been ruined. Chesdovi 15:02, 20 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I also dispute the fact that User:Durova said I sent “three e-mails in swift succession”. I do not have a record of the first e-mail sent, but it was sent some time before the second at 16:13: on Tues 19 Dec. The third was sent today at 12.01pm. I received a reply from User:Durova at 14:21 today. That the third was sent 31 hours after the second is not called in my mind “swift succession”. Chesdovi 15:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC)


 * By this time tommorow your block will have expired. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 15:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your concern HighInBC. However, I have been unjustly blocked and I want an apology and action taken against the blocker, She should also be blocked for 48 hours. It’s the principle which annoys me the most. She accused me of adding “several” silly edits after my warning which is untrue. When my additions were deleted by the notorious “reverter” User:ALM_scientist she calls it: "reverting my damage". I was livid when I tried to edit, finding out I had been blocked. Do you know what it feels like to be blocked, not to mention the scar that will remain on my log forever? I want wiki justice. Chesdovi 15:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Why ?
I do not want to be part of this dispute. However, you said Why did User:ALM scientist delete this?. So I try to explain.
 * 1) Moinuddin Chishti is a person and not a "SITE". If you said his Tomb then it might be right but you have not said it at all. Even his tomb it is not at all second holiest site. Muslims are very clear about their first and second holiest site.
 * 2) Jewish soldiers at the Buraq Wall, the third holiest Islamic site in Jerusalem, itself the third holiest city in Islam, being on the third planet in the solar system Do you think that this third planet thing was valid edit??
 * 3) You write Al-Aqsa Mosque is the second holiest Site in Islam.  Once again this article is not about second/third holiest. Also we Muslims are very clear that what is our second holiest, you cannot use one source and deny 100 of other sources.
 * 4) "Chinguetti is sometimes said to be 'the seventh holiest city of Islam'" Once again this was not about ranking.
 * 5) My revert comes after many of your other wrong edits. For example check this one In that you said In BOLD at the top of article  . Note: This list is not a top ten music chart. Do you think that someone should continue to assume good faith towards your edits when you vandalize and article multiple time? It becomes very difficult. --- ALM 18:36, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Why indeed?
User:ALM scientist I wish you wouldn't interfere; you have already caused me enough trouble.


 * 1) The page was created with Dargah Sharief, India, i.e. Moinuddin Chishti . In truth when I linked Dargah Sharief later on, it was to the Moinuddin Chishti page.  Hence when it was re-added in haste I just put Moinuddin Chishti. It still currently features. But I can understand the mistake.
 * 2) Time stamp for the final warning is 14:38, 18 December 2006.
 * 3) We have been through this before and when WP:RS were quoted they were kept. I think it is very WP:POV for you to discount this opinion, especially as it isn't a tourist site.
 * 4) Correct, but this is about holiest sites, under which case this falls. There is no harm in stating that it is regarded as 7th. The page states Mecca as considered first and Medina the second? Please User:ALM scientist, let’s have some consistency here!
 * 5) This addition was in semi-good faith. Look what happed after I re-ordered the page into alphabetical order: "correct order" It now does read like a Top Ten music chart, something you are especially against: “Once again this article is not about second/third holiest”. If it isn't why does it feature Mecca, Medina, and Jerusalem in decending order. The cheek of it. Chesdovi 19:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)


 * We can remove ranking information from Mecca and Medina sections too. Also ordering them alphabetically is okay with me. Please tell me if those actions will satisfy you? btw I am sorry that you were blocked really and can we be friends please ? --- ALM 12:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Administrators%27_noticeboard
Normally it doesn't take this long to get an unblock review so I've posted a request to WP:AN along with a note about the request for a 48 hour retributive block. I check my e-mails about once a day so the e-mail issue was mostly a matter of timing. Editors have a reasonable expectation that blocks are based on policy rather than personalities and, to some extent, I can sympathize with the frustration of an editor who's blocked without a reply or a review. Durova Charg e! 17:49, 20 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I reviewed it yesterday, and declined it, but decided to return the request to give the user another opinion. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 17:55, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Re Unblock request...
Can you explain to me your mistakes and errors in this series of events? ---J.S (T/C) 21:07, 20 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I am not denying that I added questionable information or two examples of totally inappropriate sites. What I am protesting about is the fact that after my only and final warning from an administrator I continued to make additions, one of which has been labelled “silly”, but I believe not a reason for blockage. The other several additions were taken out of context since they were indeed legitimate additions and not what has been labelled “damage”. I think it was thought that any further additions would be disruptive, but this is not the case, as the page needed updating. I have not got the time right now to go through each and every edit but if you go trough them I am confident you will not find any incriminating evidence! Many thanks for your time and interest. Chesdovi 21:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah


Hi Dovi! I just want to say Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah to you! Have a nice holiday time. And also thank you for your great synagogues contributions. - Darwinek 21:03, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

And happy Hanukkah to you too Chesdovi. Quite fitting with the Synagogue article on DYK. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:49, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeshivat haMekubalim Beit QeL
Thanks for your kind words on my talk page. Concerning the images, I did spend quite some time on working the positions and sizes. Is it really better all on the right uniformly sized? Shalo-m ouVerakhah, hasofer 21:45, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I can appreciate the time spent on making the page look appealing, however I thought it looked a bit on the messy side and think the current format is neater and more reader friendly. Images could possibly be spread out differently if the article was sectioned. Chesdovi 13:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Please Don't Use Weird Ideas On Discussions
In mediation of the 3rd holiest site in Islam u said something very unusual. You claim that u want Israel to invade Mecca. That made no sense at all. I have a few questions

1.You claim Islrael does not represent the Jewish people, but they r going to be the invaders? 2.Mecca is not even significant in Judaism at all, so how would u make it the 3rd holiest 3.What does this have to do with the 3rd holiest site in Islam? 4.What do u mean u support Assyrian independance? I have never heard of such a movement. That would mean there would be a Syria and an Assyria?
 * Quite simple, The Iranian Government doesn’t represent the PA, nor does it represent the Muslim nation, but has made it quite clear that it would invade Israel if and when the time comes. If Iran wants to liberate “Palestine” on behalf of the “Palestinians” then I can understand Israel wanting to liberate Mecca on behalf of the Jews. It doesn’t mean they represent them. Chesdovi 13:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Quite simple, make up a story that Moses was whisked away to Arabia on a winged steed and then get the Israeli army to conquer Mecca just as the Arab armies conquered and occupied Jerusalem against the indigenous peoples will. After all the Kaaba was built by Abraham the first Jew and Ishmael is a prophet in Judaism. And there’s no need for mention in the Bible of Mecca since Jerusalem isn’t mentioned in the Koran. Chesdovi 13:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Quite simple, Jerusalem our holiest site, is, according to you, Islam’s 3rd. It only follows that Mecca, Islam’s holiest should be Judaism’s 3rd. Why is there no UN resolution condemning the fact that Jews aren’t allowed to enter their 3rd holiest shrine, occupied by the Saudi regime? Chesdovi 13:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * ok, forget question 4, turns out there is such a movement. —The preceding unsigned comment was left by Talib 72
 * Isn’t funny that most people haven’t heard of any of the places where there are people fighting for independence, why is it only “Palestine” that is ever publicised? Take for instance in today’s London Metro newspaper, on a page dedicated to people’s New Year resolutions, one man holds a placard saying he wishes world leaders would solve the “Palestinian issue”. I wonder if he has heard of all the other trouble spots over the planet? I call it Arab propaganda and hatred of Israel. Chesdovi 13:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Curious
Hi,

I'm just curious as to how you found out about Template:Infobox religious building? I saw that you created several pages using the template. Its not particularly well documented and I'm humbled that others find it useful, especially since I had no idea what I was doing while I wrote it. Thanks. -- Sapphire 07:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think I first saw it on the Old New Synagogue page. When I started using it I had a hard time finding different instances where and how it was used. I think I looked under your contributions. I think using it gives a more formal look to the page. There is a problem when entering information under the dome dia. and height, I don't know if this can be rectified. I also wonder if it could be updated to include other fields to accommodate synagogues? Chesdovi 13:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


 * What ideas did you have for synagogues? I have to admit that I'm fairly ignorant about synagogues and Judaic culture so I tried to make it as generic as possible.  Also, what were the problems with dome dia. and height?  I don't notice any problems here.  Thanks. -- Sapphire 09:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Modzitz
Nice pictures! --Redaktor 00:11, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Bobov
Hi Chesdovi. You did a beautiful job on the Bobov article, making it neat and clear. I am glad that finally someone can take away the total responsibility that I carried to keep these pages neutral. I would ask you, if you can please rewrite all the articles in the Bobov series; as I am a Bobov 45 Streeter and can be accused of pushing a side.

The other articles that need rewriting are Yehoshua Rubin and Ben Zion Halberstam (The Second).

While on this topic; maybe you can right a wrong; namely that the article was deliberately named "Ben Zion Halberstam (The Second)" to make him on Wikipedia, the de facto Bobover Rebbe; as the name insinuates that he is the second Bobover Rebbe with the name Ben Zion. I think for neutrality and fairness the name of the article should be renamed "Ben Zion Aryeh Leibish Halberstam" leaving the current name as a redirect; as he is Rabbi Ben Zion the second in Bobov but Rabbi Ben Zion Aryeh Leibish the first. I'm interested in your thoughts on this. Issac 17:04, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * a gite vokh. It depends a bit on how widely known he is (or perhaps was, since his chasidim presumably no longer call him by his name). If the name Ben Zion Arye Leibish is generally recognizable, it is fair to use this as the title for article. --Redaktor 23:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * In all fairness he was called "Ben Zion the Ruv's". Very few people if any called him "Ben Zion Aryeh Leibish" although most Bobover Chasidim knew what his full name was, but shortened it for convenience. Maybe his mother called him so, occasionally; as he was named "Aryeh Leibish" after her father; but I doubt anybody called him so.


 * Nevertheless I think most articles in Wikipedia of Rabbonim aren't named by the way people called them; maybe there are some redirects here & there; but by and large they are named here by their official names. Take for example his brother Reb Naftule Zvi. Nobody called him Naftule Zvi; he was first called "Reb Naftulche"; then later on people decided that it's not bekovidig to call him so; so they started calling him "Reb Naftule". IMO his article should also be renamed "Naftali Zvi Halberstam" and leave the current version as a redirect.


 * Also the term the "second" connotes that he is the second holding that position with that name; but that's exactly the main point on what Beth Din is sitting on; and should Wikipedia prejudge this issue?


 * Even though I think that it's wrong for many reasons; including the integrity of the Encyclopedia; I am not out to push this issue; and should you and all fair Wikipedians think otherwise; I yield to your judgment. Thanks; Issac 16:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks Chesdovi for reverting the vandalism on Rabbi Ungers page. The same vandalizer also vandalized Rabbi Halberstams page; I would prefer if you did the reversion. Thanks again for your fairness. Issac 19:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

The Sassanid Jewish Vassel state in Judea 610 CE
To answer your question. Supporters of "Palestinian rights" make the claim that there were no Jews in "Palestine" after the destruction of Herod's Temple in 70 CE, sometimes extending that to 135 to include the Bar Kochba revolt. I say the Jewish state of 610-21 is "forbidden knowledge" because most supporters of "Palestinian rights" deny that it ever existed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ericl (talk • contribs) 15:17, 5 February 2007 (UTC).

Please help improve and expand this article
Your contributions will be greatly appreciated Here. thestick 14:49, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Call me what you like Thestick, but as far as I'm concerned you should be diagnosed with False consensus effect. Chesdovi 15:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Al Aqsa Mosque Holiest page in the world
Can you please explain once again your beef with the Al-Aqsa mosque section in the holiest sites in islam article? thestick 15:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, at least my case isn't as acute as whatever you think I have called you. Just what kind of "Evidence" do you want? thestick 15:52, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thestick, please provide evidence:


 * That Muhammad ascended to heaven from the Sakhrah.

Some quran and hadith talk about this.
 * That Islamic holy scriptures call the Al Aqsa Mosque third holiest place.

That hadith which says about the 3 most sacred places (value of prayers thing) - Common sense solves the rest.
 * That the King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals retracted their claim that Al Juwana Mosque is third holiest site in Islam.

Its that not there, thats enough proof - just forget it dude.
 * That Shia Muslims regard Al Aqsa Mosque as third holiest.

Several shia organizations, the shia goverments and of course shia people ahve stated the same.
 * That Muslim Cypriots do not reagrd Hala Sultan Tekke as third holiest.

Firstly, cypriotic muslims follow the Quran and Hadith - I had fun doing this one, just search google for some cypriotic establishments that has made it's phone number public. Just ask them "Is the Al-Aqsa mosque in jerusalem the third holiest site in Islam?" - yes
 * Sidepoints:
 * Of Muslim property rights to the Haram-es-Sharif; a record of a transaction will do.

- You can contact the Islamic Waqf foundation or whatever it's called
 * That the Al Aqsa Mosque was built with a valid construction permit. Chesdovi 16:26, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

The world didnt come into existence in 1948. thestick 17:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:PD-Romania-Photo
Template:PD-Romania-Photo has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --Sherool (talk) 12:53, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Notablity of Myrna Star
Thank you for your concern. The main reason why I created this article is I was very surprised to see an article for this person: Kat Gutierrez. Myrna Star is actually more well known and notable in the California Import scene than her. If her website was up, other editors could verify it. Unfortunately, what I know falls in Wikipedia's no original research, so it may have been the best that this was deleted for now. I will not contest the deletion, however I do believe that it may have been more appropriate to go to AfD rather than place a speedy delete tag. I've created over 100 articles and so far that was the only article that was ever deleted. I am very familiar with the notablity guidelines of Wikipedia. This was just a rare borderline case. -- † Ðy§ep§ion † Speak your mind 16:39, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Initials in names
Hi this is regarding your question on my page on certain persons being referred to by their initials like M. R. Pai. It is how the person was referring to himself in life. Many older people present themselves by their initials. My grandfather used to be V S Kudva, some local people here are called A V Shetty, C R Kamath. Younger people generally don't use initials in their names. Just an old convention I guess that was used in India.-- PremKudva Talk  03:46, 28 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I got your reply and have renamed the articles of the persons in the full names, with redirects from the article with their initials.-- PremKudva Talk  04:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi
Hi there. Devoto Palace was categorised, I don't understand why did you put there the "uncategorised" tag... Regards --Damifb 13:07, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, thanks; don't worry.--Damifb 13:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

About my article
I notice that you have tagged in my article Normand Roger for "sources" and "uncategorized". I understand the "sources" and I'll try to add but I don't know what the hell "uncategorized" is. What must I do to "categorize" the article? can you help me? Appleworm 14:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * How to make it not a copied-and-pasted article? I deem that Wikipedia's content are from different sources? Appleworm 16:20, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much. I'll reword it. Appleworm 09:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Nawab of Banganapalle
I have read your message. Actually it seems, you havenot read the article clearly. While he was on his throne, because of his inability to rule, the HEIC have taken the territory for a brief period. Finally it was returned to him just before a few days before his death. Now, does it got clarified.

It was indeed true that he abducted the throne in 1822(actually, it was gimmic done by the family to continue the lineage, ok). Then, he ruled upto 1832 untill the british annexed it. Got, clarified. If you want more information, then refer the website, http://www.4dw.net/royalark/India/bangana2.htm. Bsskchaitanya 07:36, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Aseminae article
I'm little confused why you would put a references template on an article that has nothing to be referenced. It's just a stub derived from its parent article. I don't think we need to reference basic information derived from the next link up the taxobox. Hatch68 16:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Infobox Rebbe
I prefer the colours I spent some time choosing, but it's not worth an edit war.--Redaktor 23:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Old City of Jerusalem
Hi! Just would like to inform you that contrary to what you left in a talk page of an editor, this World Heritage Site was inscribed on 1981 on the List. One year later, it was inscribed on the Danger List. In other words, it has been inscribed on two separate occasions, and on two different lists that are under one program (i.e. World Heritage program). Refer to this official link: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/148 Joey80 15:21, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Criticism of Judaism
Hi Chesdovi. In relation to editing this article, could you please explain at the talk page what you meant by Unauthorized duplication is strictly forbidden? Thanks in advance. --  FayssalF  - Wiki me up ®  10:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I just followed the link given which states: The Truth About the Talmud is copyrighted material excerpted from Michael A. Hoffman's book, "Judaism's Strange Gods" which was published in the year 2000 - Unauthorized duplication is strictly forbidden. Btw, this addition was added by User:Benyehuda on its own page on 11 March 07 and was subsequently deleted by User:Newyorkbrad. The next previous day exactly the same was added by User:Thestick. I am convinced User:Thestick was trying to add offensive material under a different username. I asked User:Newyorkbrad if any action should be taken (if there was enough evidence) against this sock-puppetry. I have not yet had a reply. Chesdovi 12:42, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your detailed explanation. Fair enough and happy editing Chesdovi. --  FayssalF  - Wiki me up ®  12:48, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What...The...Hell? thestick 13:21, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I created that section on march 10th, nice distortion of the facts chesdovi . Also I think citing Hoffman's article is fair use, it was not a 'reproduction' and was written in 3rd person. thestick 13:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Try to source it and change the wording. That would sort out the issue. --  FayssalF  - Wiki me up ®  13:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I sourced with a link to Hoffman's page too, also I didnt write about racism in the talmud, I wrote about the verses considered by michael hoffman as racist/hate literature. Any suggestions? thestick 13:30, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Try to rewrite it and discuss it at the article talk page. --  FayssalF  - Wiki me up ®  13:34, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The truth is that all the quotes User:Thestick added are in fact the real distortions. Maybe it should be placed under conspiracy theories, Historical revisionism, Anti-Semitism, Hate site etc. Chesdovi 13:37, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, according to the usage we get to work with in wikipedia, the title allegations is suitable as in Hamas, Criticism of the Qur'an and Criticism of Islam. The important things are neutrality and verifiability which i believe are both respected till now. --  FayssalF  - Wiki me up ®  13:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Let User:Thestick neutralise the article by providing the rebuttals as well not just quotes which offend. Why should someone else have to do the work? Chesdovi
 * At least give me a link to a good online Talmud. thestick 13:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Talmud. Try some of those links. --  FayssalF  - Wiki me up ®  13:58, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Chesdovi 13:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, there's also this one: . Good luck. Chesdovi 14:06, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I still haven't found an online Talmud - How do I find this "Moed Kattan 18a" ? thestick 14:28, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * you may need a Aramaic dictionary as well. Chesdovi 14:42, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

A request
Hi again Chesdovi. I am not sure if you are familiar w/ Punic inscriptions but could you please have a look at this page (especially the CIS I 5510.10 scripts) and give me your comments? Thanks in advance. --  FayssalF  - Wiki me up ®  14:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Third Holiest site
Here: http://www.chnphoto.ir/gallery.php?gallery_uid=187&lang=en Armyrifle 10:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I doubt it, but I'm not really sure. Armyrifle 11:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Sultan hala
I did explain the deletion in the talk page. whats more what i said is backed up by the two disclaimers on the page : one for copyright infringement and one 'worldview' disclaimer

Its your comment on the talk page thats inadequate to explmain your action kfeto

That worldwide tag stays - you know why. thestick 12:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Categorizing rabbis
Thanks for you work on this. You would save yourself (and others who might add categories afterwards a lot of typing by using  --Redaktor 16:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Mezhbizh (Hasidic dynasty) at Mediation Cabal
A long-simmering editorial dispute between and  over how to deal with information about certain Hasidic topics has reached the Mediation Cabal. Please see and provide any helpful input at Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-04-29 Mezhbizh (Hasidic dynasty). Thank you, IZAK 16:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Haredi rabbis
I see you categorise certain rabbonim in this category, even though the term would be an anachronism if applied to them (e.g. Yechiel Michel Epstein). Is there no other solution for this? JFW | T@lk  22:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The actual term "haredi" is of post-WWII coinage, and I find it very difficult to retroactively apply it to people who were absolutely haredi in spirit (such as the Vilna Gaon) but lived before the term assumed it present meaning. The distinction with modern orthodoxy cannot be made until this concept was introduced; but what is modern orthodoxy? Are they the rabbonim that sided with the zionists (which would include the Netziv, Y.Y. Reines etc) or are they the rabbonim that have made changes to halakha to make it more acceptable to potential baalei teshuva?
 * Perhaps we should discuss this on WT:JEW, where others may be able to weigh in. JFW | T@lk  11:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:ChortkovS.JPG
Hello, Chesdovi. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:ChortkovS.JPG) was found at the following location: User:Chesdovi. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or    media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 20:43, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Even shetiya.jpg
Hello, Chesdovi. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Even shetiya.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Chesdovi. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or    media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 02:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Hebron massacre newspaper.jpg
Hello, Chesdovi. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Hebron massacre newspaper.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Chesdovi. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or    media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 07:29, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Menachem Mendl Hager.jpg
Hello, Chesdovi. An automated process has found and will an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that is in your userspace. The image (Image:Menachem Mendl Hager.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Chesdovi. This image or media will be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. This does not necessarily mean that the image is being deleted, or that the image is being removed from other pages. It is only being removed from the page mentioned above. All mainspace instances of this image will not be affected Please find a free image or    media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 21:50, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:MG TF.jpg
Hello, Chesdovi. An automated process has found and will an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that is in your userspace. The image (Image:MG TF.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Chesdovi. This image or media will be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. This does not necessarily mean that the image is being deleted, or that the image is being removed from other pages. It is only being removed from the page mentioned above. All mainspace instances of this image will not be affected Please find a free image or    media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 22:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Tiferesyisrael48.jpg
Hello Chesdovi, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Tiferesyisrael48.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Chesdovi. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 01:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Tiferet ceiling.jpg
Hello Chesdovi, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Tiferet ceiling.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Chesdovi. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 01:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Vilna Syn. exterior.jpg
Hello Chesdovi, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Vilna Syn. exterior.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Chesdovi. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 06:23, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Vilnius Synagoga, J.Kamarauska.jpg
Hello Chesdovi, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Vilnius Synagoga, J.Kamarauska.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Chesdovi. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 06:23, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

List of synagogues
The list of synagogues is not supposed to be a guide to active synagogues but a guide to all synagogues (like the ruins of Etz Hayyim Synagogue in Greece), so those that were destroyed should remin on the page (in my opinion). On their individual pages they are denoted as having been destroyed or inactive. -NYC2TLV 21:28, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Rabbi rakow.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Rabbi rakow.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Expanding Tzuf Dvash Synagogue
Hello. I am thinking of expanding the article to include more general details on the development of the North African Jewish community of the old city. I also want to add info on the Tovi Yishbau yeshiva (now Torat Kohanim). Do you think this should this be done in the current article (with an appropriate name change) or in a new one? nadav (talk) 01:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Although I see the advantage of having all the information on one page, I am inclined to leave this page exclusively for information about the synagogue and create a new one about Torat Kohanim Yeshiva, as in Ateret Cohanim which has a redlink to Torat Chaim Yeshiva which had used the same building previously. We would then retain the Tzuf Dvash Synagogue listed under Category:Synagogues in Jerusalem. I am not quite sure in which article you could add information about the development of the North African Jewish community – maybe it would require its own page? Chesdovi 09:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem is that I have just enough content on the community to provide background but not enough for an independent article. It mostly involves the Tovi Yishbau yeshiva so I suppose I'll just create the page like you said and then put it there. Best, nadav (talk) 09:47, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:MG TF.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:MG TF.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Hasidic dynasties stub
I like your new stub (and will incorporate it into new Hasidic dynasty article stubs). But please replace the picture (it isn't the Baal Shem Tov) by something more suitable. Even a gartl will do until you find something better. --Redaktor 15:44, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It is the Baal Shem Tov - the Baal Shem of London! PS. Did you notice Kretchniff? Chesdovi 15:47, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Baal Shem of London was not, I think, called Baal Shem Tov. Are you asking me about the merge proposal for Kretshenef? Good idea, but give it a week. --Redaktor 22:49, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Hasidic dynasties-stub
Hi - a stub template or category which you created has been nominated for deletion or renaming at Stub types for deletion. The stub type, which was not proposed at WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, does not meet the standard requirements for a stub type, either through being incorrectly named, ambiguously scoped, or through failure to meet standards relating to the current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first! Grutness...wha?  02:26, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

about Ezra sun of God
Man I am Jewish myself and of course it is not true. But it only show mistake in the Quran that why I want it to be accurate. The Muslims change it from "the Jews say" to "some Jews say" but it is only because they know there is mistake in the Quran.Anyway I think I will add it also in criticize of the Quran.132.72.149.74 14:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Maghen Abraham Synagogue photo
Shalo'wm w elr to'wv. Sorry, but I was the one who deleted the old pic. If you need it for some reason, I could find it online again (with its reference being mentioned). But, what do you want it for.

Drop me a line asap.

To'wdah w lihtrao'wt. - Omar 180 15:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

P.S. You said you're of Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry. Where do you live?

I Found it
Shalo'wm. I found the pic, but there's another one also (which shows both the facade and the left side of the building). I hope you know much about license, hence I'll leave you to do the rest. To get the pic(s), click here. Also let me know where the copy is uploaded into. - Omar 180 19:32, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Guess I never mentioned it to you. I as the one who uploaded the pic under my old account. But I just learnt something. If you must upload the pic, it's best to use the Creative Common 2.0 (or newer) license tag.


 * And I don't know if you know much on Middle Eastern languages, such as Arabic or Hebrew. But if you're interested, I could teach you the basics (but I'm better in Arabic on that than in Hebrew). If interested, click [mailto:omar_kaj@yahoo.com here]. - Omar 180 22:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

mosque
Amazing that you should be the one to insist that the Dome of the Rock is the most important symbol of the Old City. I believe the messy and unattractive photo that you think belongs there does the page a great disservice. Without saying that this old Jaffa Gate picture is the best one there is, it is certainly a heck of a lot better than the current one. And if you are so concerned about this page, by the way, it needs a huge amount of work. The information provided is superficial at best.--Gilabrand 17:01, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I can see from your message that you take umbrage that a “mosque” should be shown in the infobox. Besides for wikipedia not being the place for petty politics, the Dome of the Rock is in fact not a mosque, (well, at least there is great disagreement about it, see This is the true story). Secondly many Jewish homes feature paintings and photos of this “mosque” as it is the holiest site. If you think, in truth, that this photo is awful, you are the one who has bad taste. The Old City contains mosques and churches – it’s a fact that can not and should not be denied. Chesdovi 21:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Chortkov Kloiz.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Chortkov Kloiz.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 14:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Allegations of Jordanian apartheid
An article that you have been involved in editing, Allegations of Jordanian apartheid, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Allegations of Jordanian apartheid. Thank you. Sef rin gle Talk 06:44, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

this might interest you
Articles for deletion/List of Messianic Jews and Hebrew Christians --Yeshivish 06:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Jerusalemsukkas.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Jerusalemsukkas.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 16:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Allegations of Chinese apartheid AfD
Following your recent participation in Articles for deletion/Allegations of French apartheid, you may be interested to know that a related article, Allegations of Chinese apartheid, is currently being discussed on AfD. Comments can be left at Articles for deletion/Allegations of Chinese apartheid. -- ChrisO 15:57, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

New West End Synagogue
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have perfomed a web search with the contents of New West End Synagogue, and it appears to be a substantial copy of. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 12:52, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you meant
Separation barrier

Hi. Is it possible to align-left the 1st column aswell? Chesdovi 13:02, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Unless you want it in a boxed setting? That-Vela-Fella 05:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok, I'll see what I can do to make it look better. Let me know if it still looks bad. That-Vela-Fella 20:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Rashi picture
You need to add the source of the picture - where did you find the image? Otherwise it's going to be deleted just as it was before. Everyone knows that this is an old picture that can't possibly be copyright, and probably dates to before there was even such a thing as copyright, but we have nudniks here who insist that this be documented. Zsero 19:47, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Zsero 23:04, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh well, the nudniks attack again. They want information that nobody can give them, because nobody knows who drew the picture or when.  And nobody is ever going to sue WP for including it.  But they don't really care about that.  Zsero 14:52, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No, we don't. I don't anyway. But since there now is a public domain image Image:Rashi woodcut.jpg which Zsero uploaded (good job btw) there is no need anymore for Image:Rashi.jpg. Do you mind if it gets deleted? Otherwise I think will take it to WP:IFD. Garion96 (talk) 20:34, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Take it to IFD if you wish, I will vote keep. Chesdovi 21:54, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I listed it for deletion here. Garion96 (talk) 22:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

About Autofellatio
I think it's a case of WP:JIMBOSAID, here - consensus and opinions can change over a couple of years and the content disclaimer does say it clearly - there's even a consensus on the TFD that it shouldn't be used in mainspace. Will (talk) 13:18, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Indo-Burma barrier
I nominated your article Indo-Burma barrier for DYK. If you want to change or fiddle with the hook, please feel free! -- Mattisse 19:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Chatam Sofer colour.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Chatam Sofer colour.JPG. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Avi 14:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * See Image:Chasamsofer.JPG from commons. Also, the rationale you gave is incorrect, as thpainting is not being brought to discuss teh PAINTING, but the man. See Non-free content #8. Thank you. -- Avi 14:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Once again, please review the fair-use rationales. You may not claim fair-use on a copyrighted painting to identify the subject of the painting. -- Avi 15:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I have re-licensed the image to a GNU Free Documentation License as I think in the UK if you take a photo of a painting, you can claim a new copyright over the image. The other image currently available will no doubt be soon deleted as no source information will be found to date the image as being copyright free. Chesdovi 15:13, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, but wikipedia is governed under US law, and I believe that a photograph of a painting is not considered a new work, similar to how the scan of a magazine cover is not considered a new work. -- Avi 15:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * "However, the interaction of Wikipedia, the GFDL, and international law is still under discussion." Does this therefore mean that at the moment such image are permitted? Chesdovi 15:20, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I do not know, but the image I substituted is undeniably acceptable as an image over 100 years old (I supplied sourcing, by the way), and is thus the better option since there is no legal issue at all with it, besides it being the canonical picture of the Chasam Sofer ZTVK"L. -- Avi 15:36, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately there is a serious breach of copyright by using the newly uploaded image. The website it is from states: The copyright of the Beth Hatefutsoth website, in its entirety, belongs to Beth Hatefutsoth The Nahum Goldmann Museum of the Jewish Diaspora. No section may be copied without the prior written permission of the Museum.  Chesdovi 15:40, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Per the Supreme court, they cannot copyright something whose copyright expired over 100 years ago. See Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp.. -- Avi 16:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Let’s say the artist (Ber Frank Halevi) was 30 in 1850 (mid 19th cent) add est. 30 years till his death = 1880, then add the required 70 years after death for the copyright to elapse = 1950. Therefore there is another 57 years need to wait before we can rely on the Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp? Chesdovi 16:07, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * No. Since the original painting is in the public domain now, even if the artist died as late as 1907, all two-dimensional reproductions are ipso facto in the public domain as well, due to the lack of originality. -- Avi 16:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

What is your role?
What is your role within Wikipedia, seeing that you love to edit anything I do.

I am not complaining, mind you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marfan8 (talk • contribs) 05:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * You still haven't disclosed where you got the image of R' Bezalel Rakow from? Chesdovi 07:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Lukashenko
I didn't know about the anti-Semite bit. However, such feeling in the former Soviet Union is (sadly) common. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:05, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Yaakov Meridor stamp.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Yaakov Meridor stamp.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Yated Ne'eman front page.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Yated Ne'eman front page.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:30, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Yated Ne'eman.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Yated Ne'eman.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Dovid Moshe Friedman.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Dovid Moshe Friedman.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:23, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Maimonides stamp.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Maimonides stamp.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Jacob Meir stamp.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Jacob Meir stamp.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 01:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Hamodia.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Hamodia.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:King Hussein of Jordan stamp.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:King Hussein of Jordan stamp.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:47, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Tefillin
Just to let you know, your hold on this article expired several days ago. Might I suggest that you pass, fail or extend the hold of the article? Cheers, CP 16:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 16 days now since the article is on hold. -Yamanbaiia (talk) 17:25, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Shmuel Salant stamp.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Shmuel Salant stamp.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:58, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Yitzhak Rabin stamp.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Yitzhak Rabin stamp.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:43, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Wailing Wall, Palestine Post 1934.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Wailing Wall, Palestine Post 1934.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 00:49, 24 December 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Muchness (talk) 00:49, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

January 2008
Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your recent edit appears to have added incorrect information, and has been reverted or removed. All information in the encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable published source. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Please do not amend information boxes inappropriately RolandR (talk) 19:11, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Chesdovi, you and I have been accused of vandalism to the Arab citizens of Israel article. I hope this is a simple misunderstanding, but I suspect something more insidious is going on.  False accusations such as this cannot be left unanswered.  I call your attention to the message I left on RolandR's talk page. Hertz1888 (talk) 21:47, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Please also note the reply I have left on Hertz1888's talk page. And please read articles and infoboxes before you amend them. RolandR (talk) 22:02, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Response given at User talk:RolandR. Hertz1888 (talk) 22:43, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Arab Citizens of Israel
User talk:RolandR doesn’t seem to like the changes I made to Arab citizens of Israel. What I thought were constructive changes, he calls vandalism! I can see you have expanded on this page significantly. Please look through the recent changes and messages left on User talk:RolandR talk page and let me know your view? Best, Chesdovi (talk) 23:39, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for calling my attention to this discussion. I have added my opinion on the discussion page. Screen stalker (talk) 06:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration
Please see the above link as I have requested arbitration for a dispute that you are involved in. Feel free to contribute there. Regards,  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  17:09, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 22:12, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Idea for Talmud articles
Hi Chesdovi: I am reposting the following request from User on my user talk page for wider notification:


 * I was thinking of trying to stimulate development of a series of articles on Gemara concepts and doctrines, maybe to help children or newcomers to Gemara with explanations of some fundamental concepts that recur throughout the Gemara. Some examples might be articles on Yiush, Chazakah, Ta'aninun (as in "Ta'aninun L'Yoresh"), Eidim Zomemin (forgive my awful transliterations), Migu, etc., etc. Maybe we could even create a category or subcategory for it. I created Breira in this vein. As I don't have the experience or expertise in Wikipedia to know what to do to best develop this idea, I figured I'd come to you for your opinions on: (1) whether it's a good idea; and (2) How to best go about implementing it. Thanks Sh76us (talk) 15:56, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Centralized discussion at: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism. Thank you. IZAK (talk) 05:28, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Java7837
I am a teenager, Wikipedia is not my life! I am learning Computer Programming in College! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.115.29.172 (talk) 19:53, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles
This arbitration has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The area of conflict in this case shall be considered to be the entire set of Arab-Israeli conflict-related articles, broadly interpreted. An uninvolved administrator, after issuing a warning, may impose sanctions including blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project. The Committee shall convene a working group, composed of experienced Wikipedians in good standing, and task it with developing a comprehensive set of recommendations for resolving the pervasive problem of intractable disputes centered around national, ethnic, and cultural areas of conflict. The group shall be appointed within two weeks from the closure of this case, and shall present its recommendations to the Committee no later than six months from the date of its inception. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 01:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Shomrei haChomos.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Shomrei haChomos.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Front for the Liberation of the Golan Heights requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. -- Rudy Breteler (talk) 00:39, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I am curious to learn more about the Front for the Liberation of the Golan Heights. If this is indeed an existing organization, it should make for a good article. I would prefer to see it expanded rather then deleted. Rudy Breteler (talk) 01:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Front for the Liberation of the Golan Heights
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Front for the Liberation of the Golan Heights, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Front for the Liberation of the Golan Heights. Jmlk 1  7  06:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Israel stamps
Hi. I just uploaded some stamps and claimed free use, pursuant to Israeli law. See Category talk:Stamps of Israel. Did you already try this route with your stamps? Pls reply to my Talk. Thanks. HG | Talk 22:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Infobox religious building colors
Chesdovi, I have felt for a while that the original colors I had chosen on the infobox have needed some revision and would like to ask if you would help. As we've come to this issue over the colors for the Jewish religions I would like to get those resolved and if you are willing work with me and Jayjg to remedy the other colors. I have a feeling the more eyes we get on it and opinions we can have the better things will come out. -- Dan9186(T • E • C) February 7, 2008 08:02 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Ben Zakai.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Ben Zakai.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:01, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:MG TF.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:MG TF.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Liftarn (talk) 16:26, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Hebron_massacre_newspaper.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Hebron_massacre_newspaper.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. OsamaK 11:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:MG TF.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:MG TF.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 03:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Temple Mount
Thank you for your edit of the introduction to the Temple Mount article. I changed a few words, and think it reads better, but I want to make sure it remains accurate and faithful to your intentions. I won't mind if you modify it. I'll watch here for a possible reply. All the best, Hertz1888 (talk) 01:22, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No, that's great, and so are all your small useful edits. What would we do without you! :-) Chesdovi (talk) 01:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you sure that Temple mount has no serious significance in Christianity? Bless sins (talk) 14:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Congrats
see here.  DRosenbach  ( Talk 15:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC) (also, you may want to archive your talk page.)

I think I mixed the messages up, but I responded on the other page. --Robertert (talk) 22:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Dome of the rock image
Hi Chesdovi, How are you? Can you translate the text in this image you uploaded ? thestick (talk) 19:33, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * In the banner is a quote taken from the Book of Haggai which reads: “The glory of this latter house shall be greater [than that of the former], saith the LORD of hosts.” The two words in the picture read “Bet HaMikdash or "The Holy House", referring to the Temple in Jerusalem. Chesdovi (talk) 01:37, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and is 'Bet HaMikdash' related to the arabic phrase "Bayt al-Maqdis" which means The Holy House too, but refers to jerusalem? thestick (talk) 21:01, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * See Bayt al-Maqdis. Chesdovi (talk) 21:29, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Biblical burials
Fantastic job on continuing the article. Question: are all the graves mentioned in the article marked? David Betesh (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 16:41, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for creating the article! What do you mean by marked? Chesdovi (talk) 23:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

What I mean is, is there an indicator at these specific places that so and so was buried there? (So that we have some type of proof other then what it says in the Bible)... By the way, I think this is the first time in history that such an expansive page was made referencing where all these Biblical heros have been buried... The reason why I created the page is because in my mind, all this stuff was scrambled, and I wanted to have it written down in an organized and correct way. You did very nicely with your assistance. Thank you and keep up the good work.David Betesh (talk) Dovi- two things. One- we have a picture of Joshua's tomb in Joshua...Should we not use that picture? Also- I left the location of where you can find photos of Ezekiel's Tomb. I personally don't know how to upload pictures onto wikipedia, but can you give it a shot? They are interesting pictures. David Betesh (talk)
 * Besides from the Cave of Machpela, Kever Rochel and a few others, all graves attributed to biblical personalities were revealed by the kabbalists in different generations. The Arizal revealed quite a few through ruach hakodesh. It is upon their testimony that we rely, for any markers are long gone, (besides from the ones the State of Israel has put up, which themselves rely on these religious sources). The Ramban for instance believed Kever Rochel to be in Ramah, but when he arrived in the Holyland, he saw the structure outside Beit Lechem and changed his position on the matter. Regarding the internet photos, it is practically impossible to upload these images onto wikipedia, as they need to be free from any copyright issues. Generally old photos or personal ones are used on wiki. Chesdovi (talk) 23:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

1. Are you just saying that Arizal basically "guessed" these places up? 2. Yes, I heard the opinion before that Rachel was buried more in the Shevet Efraim area (north) and not in the Judea area- it makes more sense...3. It is important that in the article we stress that these are traditional places and not based on facts because we don't want to mislead anyone. 5. I think we should be on the lookout for Ezekiel Tomb photo because from what I hear, this place is very important in Iraq.David Betesh (talk)
 * Quite a few of the sites were apparently transmitted from generation to generation and there are historical accounts from travellers which state their existence. The Arizal visited many of the already attributed sites and confirmed or dismissed that they were in fact the authentic tomb. He also revealed other previously unknown ones. I think expanding on the intro is a good idea. Chesdovi (talk) 13:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Then can I quote you a bit for the introduction? You can change it if you'd like.David Betesh (talk)
 * It would be better to use reliable source material. There are a few books on the subject and when I get hold of one I will try and use it to write a good introdution. The linked Hebrew version may contain some good content. See what you can come up with! Chesdovi (talk) 00:17, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Joseph's tomb is pretty reliable, and there are old photos and drawings that are now in the public domain and could be used. -- Zsero (talk) 00:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I think it would be interesting to expand this and make separate articles on the lesser-known tombs that do not have articles yet...For example: Tomb of Joshua, Tomb of Ezekiel etc.David Betesh (talk)

Dome of the rock
What's left to be discussed? (please reply here) thestick (talk) 23:33, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Please explain what you mean by "sneakily fixed contradiction based on a '99.9% majority wins' conclusion". Chesdovi (talk) 23:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The overwhelming majority of sources call that area the third holiest site, and I tried to remove it without you noticing (failed obviously) . thestick (talk) 23:37, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Please refer to Talk:Al-Masjid al-Nabawi for clarification from User:Mpatel. Chesdovi (talk) 23:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * hehehehehehe thestick (talk) 23:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * What's so funny?! Chesdovi (talk) 23:52, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like you ran to the dome of the rock article after that discussion with user:Mpatel, also I saw some featured information on your userpage. thestick (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh come on it's been more than a year and a half already. thestick (talk) 18:53, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Avrohom_Yaakov_Friedman.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Avrohom_Yaakov_Friedman.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 08:26, 18 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kelly hi! 08:26, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * What are you talking about? The source is clearly given.  -- Zsero (talk) 10:08, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

David Applebaum
Would you please come help out at the David Applebaum page. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Becca02459 (talk • contribs) 15:26, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Message
Please see my message on your user page on Commons. --Redaktor (talk) 13:09, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Wailing Wall, Palestine Post 1934.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Wailing Wall, Palestine Post 1934.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 08:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Wailing Wall Road, 1967.jpeg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Wailing Wall Road, 1967.jpeg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 08:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Western Wall images
Please note that the two images which you say are in use on Western Wall are not currently used there. You can add them back if they are useful but otherwise the images are liable to be deleted. Please also note that User:BJBot is a bot, i.e. an automated computer process, and can't respond to you. Stifle (talk) 15:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Zionist offencive
Hello! Rabbi. 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)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Muhammad al-Durrah stamp.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Muhammad al-Durrah stamp.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Minyan
Shavua Tov, Chesdovi! We both know that you can't simply delete all references to everything you disagree with. You didn't just delete all mention of Conservative Reform, you deleted all the material the Frimer brothers had published in Tradition, and a lot more as well. I don't like giving warnings, but I'm going to have to give you one here. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 02:28, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * As it stands this page is not about minyan per se, but about the role of women in minyan. It is patently clear that over 80% of the article is about women! This material is misplaced and is better placed in Women in Judaism and Jewish services‎ to which I moved some of it, (notice a large chunk also referring to prayer with a minyan from the orthodox position). It just does not belong here. I added and refined content and it was just all reverted back without keeping any of my additions. I removed sentences which had been tagged since December 2007. I kept the conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist views, albeit in a refined manner, I did NOT delete things I do "not agree with"! We do not need all the waffle here about how conservative came to their decision. It reads like an essay, something which is discouraged on Wikipedia. The external link is quite enough for those who wish to pursue the intricacies of the debate and conclusion of the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards. Why the first paragraph about the role of women is given precedence over the origin and source is quite amusing! All the information in the paragraph is a duplication of material presented later on. The information cited from Masechet Soferim was unfortunately erroneous and therefore misleading. Other information is unsourced and is most probably OR. Chesdovi (talk) 22:44, 4 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Chesdovi. I have three concerns. My principle one is that you've repeatedly removed this content while leaving edit summaries suggesting your edits were about something else. That's a problem. My second problem is simply that you're offering your own opinion about the amount of coverage the issue has received -- like it or not, it got enormous attention, there are lots of reliable sources that the question of whether women could count in a minyan was an extremely contentious issue in Judaism in the English-speaking world in the last generation or two. My third problem involves the OR claim you made. My problem is that if you had bothered to read the cited Conservative movement source, you would have noted that the "waffle" about how the Conservative movement came to reach the decision they did is a very close-to-the-source summary of what the source says. If you want to accuse cited material of being OR, you need to bother to read the citation and check to see whether the source actually backs up what is said, as this one clearly does. You had previously opened a discussion on the subject, but right now the few people who've answered have disagreed with you. I need to give you a second warning and let you know there won't be a third. I can't block you myself on an article I've edited, but I would suggest taking this to WP:JUDAISM and trying to get more people involved in the discussion before doing anything. If you remove the content again, I'll need to take the issue to WP:ANI and ask a neutral administrator to review for a block, and I'll do this without any further warning. Like it or not, you can't remove virtually all the content on issues of immense importance to people to the left of you on grounds that you don't think it important yourself. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 13:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It was actually the Orthodox section whcih contained the waffle. The Conservative read like an essay. You are paranoid that b/c I am hold an orthodox POV I wish to subdue anything else. Look at my edits an see for yourself that that is just not the case! Chesdovi (talk) 14:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I've opened a discussion at WT:JUDAISM. I suggest that you respond there and that neither of us change the article until we get some further discussion. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 14:01, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Belz Great Synagogue
It would be very useful if you had some sort of measurement of the size of this synagogue, and of the other very large hasidic synagogues, pre-war and contemporary. They are broadly ignored in architectural history and other sources on synagogues.Elan26 (talk) 19:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)Elan26

Western Wall
Hi Chesdovi. You are quick off the mark. I've just put the article On Hold. It will make GA, but there are a few points that need cleaning up first. Pyrotec (talk) 19:54, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Its now GA-class. Congratulations.Pyrotec (talk) 19:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much!
I originally designed it for template Islam, but the community decided it didn't represent Islam well, but Islamic culture works! Thanks again! -- Enzuru 18:40, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Style
Perfect. There I was a complete dickhead, thinking of content instead of style ('began to be' is however acceptable, if no excuse)Nishidani (talk) 20:35, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Citation
Do you have a citation for this?Taprobanus (talk) 04:11, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:The Steipler biography.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:The Steipler biography.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 11:55, 2 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I made the rationale specific to the article; hopefully that will suffice. -- Zsero (talk) 07:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Image:Vilna Gaon authentic portrait.JPG
I've updated the information, based on the inscription under the copy you linked to. That picture is dated 1915. If it's a completely faithful reproduction of the original picture, then there can be no question that it's PD-old everywhere. If the 1915 artist got a bit creative, then he'd have had a copyright in it for a while at least, but by now it's at least PD-art.

Questions: I take it that you took the photo from something hanging on a wall at Yesodei Hatorah. Is that a print? An oil painting? Or what? Also, it looks from the history as if you had a larger version, but it got deleted because it was thought to be copyright. If so, do you care to upload it again, since it's no longer subject to deletion?

-- Zsero (talk) 07:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Zsero. Avi questioned me about a similar photo I took of Moses Sofer. I think to be on the safe side, maybe the 1915 version could be used? Chesdovi (talk) 23:17, 4 November 2008 (UTC)


 * If the painting you took the photo of is a faithful reproduction of the 1915 painting, as it appears to be, then the copyist has no copyright. I'm just asking since you took the photo, what is it of?  A print?  A painting?  Does it have the inscription at the bottom that the other one has, and you just cropped it out of the photo, or does it not have any inscription?  Also, your photo seems to be of better quality than the other one, and the photo you deleted was probably of even better quality, so if possible we should use that one.


 * BTW I assume this is the Yesodei Hatorah high school in Brooklyn, formerly known as Mizrachi Levanim. Do you teach there?  -- Zsero (talk) 00:45, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The image is a photo of an oil painting by a contemporary artist who tried his best to copy the 1915 print. It was taken in Yesodei Hatorah Girls School, Stamford Hill. Chesdovi (talk) 00:55, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Your comment
Thank you for your kind words. Regarding e-mailing someone, you just go to their user page and click on the "E-mail this user" link on the left hand side of the page, in the "toolbox". I hope this is helpful. Jayjg (talk) 01:03, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Eliezr_Yehuda_Waldenberg.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Eliezr_Yehuda_Waldenberg.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:41, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Hurva Synagogue
Hi Chesdovi, I've awarded this article GA-status, but I'm having problems finding a place to list it in Good articles. We have cathedrals, monasteries and mosques in Good articles - Architecture; and we have the Western Wall in Good articles - Urban and historical sites. Everything has been done apart from listing it in Good articles, any thoughts, suggestions?Pyrotec (talk) 16:18, 6 December 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, I'll move it into Architecture. I just wanted to check with you first.Pyrotec (talk) 18:16, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Birket Israel
Hello! Your submission at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed. There still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! &mdash;Politizer talk / contribs 07:14, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Looks great! It's not too late at all.  I've left some comments here on possibly using a different hook. &mdash;Politizer talk / contribs 18:25, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Santa Maria del Blanco
I see that you are an experienced editor. I cannot figure out why I cannot make the caption appear under the photo of Santa Maria del Blanco on this page. Oldest synagogues in the WorldHistoricist (talk) 23:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.Historicist (talk) 23:52, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

You may find this (Wooden synagogue) useful, or interesting. I'll be coming back to add to it. And there really ought to be pages on some of these. I'll probably do some. The only one that had a page that I could find was Jedwabna.Historicist (talk) 01:37, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Seven Arches Hotel.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Seven Arches Hotel.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Skier Dude ( talk ) 08:07, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Bobov1.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Bobov1.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 13:35, 23 December 2008 (UTC) --Magog the Ogre (talk) 13:35, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Your note

 * Thank you, and to you too! Jayjg (talk) 03:26, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for favoring me with a special greeting. What a nice surprise! May your Festival of Lights be exceptionally bright! Hertz1888 (talk) 11:20, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * א גוטע וואך, א גוטן חודש און א פֿריילעכן חנוכה. --Redaktor (talk) 21:30, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Pools of and Birket
are there any archy reports etc available?...Ashley kennedy3 (talk) 02:25, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Little context in Al-Mualek Mosque
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Al-Mualek Mosque, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Al-Mualek Mosque is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Al-Mualek Mosque, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 12:10, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Al-Mualek Mosque
No problem my friend! --Fipplet (talk) 21:31, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of International reaction to the Christmas massacres in the Democratic Republic of Congo
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article International reaction to the Christmas massacres in the Democratic Republic of Congo, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Nickhh (talk) 16:09, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Careful ...
Be very careful about making edits like this. We all get frustrated sometimes, especially about sensitive issues like this, but it's not worth it. Just some friendly advice. ;-)  shirulashem     (talk)   20:04, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Official reactions
Hi Chesdovi, I would have put a comment on that page, but it appears to be over already and resolved, no? Thanks for letting me know though. Best, Tundrabuggy (talk) 00:52, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Great work!
Appreciate very much your work in the Gaza conflict, particularly the numbers in that latest demonstration. I was looking at some numbers yesterday in regard to casualty figures in other wars, ie ratios of civilians to militants --that sort of thing. Instead, I found the same phenomenon there, that is major disparities between numbers, though it is not so clear the political orientation of some of the sources. Also it strikes me as a very good argument for not having charts of fatalities and wounded and such, unless we can be sure of the accuracy of the numbers. If I could give "barnstars", I certainly would give you one. Perhaps I can give you a Magen David instead. Best, Tundra.

Just a note. No need to reply
Some remarks in this article underline a point you made. I have great respect for Fisk. Nishidani (talk) 11:51, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

just fyi
Łańcut Synagogue, new articleHistoricist (talk) 16:10, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Good work
I always say: good job must be recognized, and what u did with "Antisemtic attacks related to Gaza conflict" was quite a good job. (I was planning to send you this message no matter what the results of the vote were, I was only waiting until they close the discussing). Yamanam (talk) 08:40, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Al-Muallaq Mosque
Hello, I know it's really not my bussiness, but the article Al-Muallaq Mosque which you created was featured in the DYK and you haven't shown that on your userpage. As it is now you have written or expanded 6 DYK articles. Don't you want to include it in your infobox and the my pages section? It probably sounds weird and I know it's not my bussiness, just wanted to tell you this. Sorry to bother. Cheers. --Fipplet (talk) 15:23, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well if you look at the infobox, the word written actually means that you start the article. So you can definitely include the Mosque. --Fipplet (talk) 20:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Antisemitic incidents alleged to be related to the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict
Hi Chesdovi, you commented on the talk page of the admin who closed this discussion as delete. I wanted to let you know that I put the deletion up for review. As far as I know, any editor can comment there, and your input would be welcome. Happy editing. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 01:08, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Chesdove, in principle I agree with you, and adding those incidents to wiki is acceptable as well, but to present them as they were facts of antisemitic actions is not acceptable (in my opinion), since most of the attackers didn't say it frankly: "we are attacking Jewish only because they are Jewish and we are antisemitic people", I mean leave this conclusion to the reader we shouldn't try to influence the readers' perception through collecting those incidents under such a title, this is my point. Regards.Yamanam (talk) 17:09, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Birket Israel
Hi Chesdovi. I have just started the GA review of this article: and whilst the text appears to be quite reasonable, I think the article as offered for WP:GAN suffers from the lack of a WP:lead. I have therefore split the article into sections and created a Lead using copy and paste. If you don't like my lead, or you feel that you can improve on my attempts, please free to change it. As yet, other than that I have not changed any of the text.Pyrotec (talk) 22:07, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your note of thanks. A nice interesting article. I just felt that it need a bit more "meat" on it, before I could give it GA - and I had a few refs to hand.Pyrotec (talk) 22:57, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Lions' Gate
How do you know that detail of the Lions' Gate carvings are "actually of leopards"? Chesdovi (talk) 14:38, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * cause I've Read it on many sites like this one :
 * municipality of Jerusalem :
 * http://www.jerusalem.muni.il/jer_sys/picture/atarim/Toursite_form_atarEng.asp?site_id=495&pic_cat=4&icon_cat=6&york_cat=9&type_id=1


 * http://www.itsgila.com/tipswalk.htm


 * Djampa (talk) 13:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Question
User:Zencv made an uncalled-for comment directed at you, here. I'm not one to make mountains out of molehills, but I think that his remark went beyond run-of-the-mill uncivility. I'd like to take it up at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. do you have any objection to me doing so? Jalapenos do exist (talk) 01:23, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

February 2009
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. Sceptre (talk) 14:53, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Hala Sutlan Tekke
Please note the following:
 * 1) No original research/noticeboard
 * 2) Reliable sources/Noticeboard Yamanam (talk) 15:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

ANI notice
An IP editor started a thread about you at ANI: Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, so I'm just letting you know. The best course of action for you is just not to respond to it, as it's a content dispute and not really relevant to ANI. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 15:58, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

jewish/muslim quarter maps
Hi Chesdovi, I don't mean to accuse you of anything, but the maps for the Muslim and Jewish quarters of Jerusalem seem to be modified from the original, placing a separation that was not their originally. Could you please explain to me why and the  maps have been modified to cut out a section of the Muslim quarter? Thanks, Nableezy (talk) 22:44, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * How observant of you! I guess it's User:Cybjorg's and your view against mine. Chesdovi (talk) 22:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I dont mean to sound antagonistic, that was not my intent if it came across that way. Was just asking why the change. Nableezy (talk) 22:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * To conform with File:OldCityMap.PNG? Chesdovi (talk) 23:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * All right, thanks for the explanation. Nableezy (talk) 23:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I am sure that the majority of sources view the Temple Mount, although under Muslim administrationship, as divorced from the Muslim Quarter. Also, a "quarter" generally refers to a place of habitation. Chesdovi (talk) 23:18, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I was under the impression that the quarters were just the divisions of the city, and most of what I seen shows the Temple Mount in the Muslim Quarter. Your reasoning is certainly valid though and we would just have to look to the sources to determine it. I was just a little surprised at the difference in the maps brought up at the AN/I thread so I just though I would ask you. Thanks for the explanation again, and I hope we can keep everything cordial and discussing instead of just arguing. Too often in these conversations the points being discussed devolve into an argument, which is something I would like to avoid if possible. Peace, Nableezy (talk) 23:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "To conform with File:OldCityMap.PNG?" - nice try. There was actually nothing for you to conform with, because that map of the old city was first uploaded on the 24th of June 2007, which is 3 months AFTER you uploaded your edited versions on the 7th of March 2007. 82.17.236.83 (talk) 06:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I added the correct version on November 1, 2007. The "original", from wikitravel, is not cast in lead. It is not authentic either! No "fabrication" has taken place here. Regarding the See also section, I am of the opinion that it would be useful to list things which are located within the quarter itself, otherwise where would one draw the line? Chesdovi (talk) 10:27, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The originals are 'not cast in lead', but the versions you edited and uploaded should be? You're pushing an agenda here.
 * On both files, it clearly says:
 * Date 2007-03-07 (original upload date)
 * Author Original uploader was Chesdovi
 * Your argument is full of holes. Stating it's not "authentic" is redundant; it's just your opinion. It's not grounds to alter anything, because it's pushing a particular POV. Just take a look at your current use of semantics; use of the phrase 'correct version' when referring to the images you edited, questioning the original's authenticity and putting the word 'original' in quotes. It's obvious as to what you're implying. The Armenian Quarter map is very different in style compared to the other maps, and comes from an Armenian source, but it also shows the Temple Mount as part of the Muslim Quarter. So taken from the point of view of one of the other quarters, we know that containing the Temple Mount within the Muslim Quarter is perfectly acceptable. You have fabricated it, because you took the original image, which was perfectly fine, and edited out the Temple Mount from the Muslim Quarter. In doing so, the only purpose it serves is to provide backbone for any arguments you may have in current and future debates regarding the old city. The point is, you took a perfectly acceptable map, and altered it for your own benefit and to suit your own viewpoint. And after finding all those other edits you made, as I demonstrated on the WP:AN/I topic, it seems that this is just the tip of the iceberg. 82.17.236.83 (talk) 12:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Look, if you have a different opinion on this matter, so be it. That is what wikipedia is about. It's is constantly being editied by people holding variant views. My use of words is merely to prompt you to see this fact. You have your view, I have mine. I am within my rights to add whatever version of map I wish. You can accuse me of POV, let's discuss it. That's what's the talk page is for. The fact that User:Cybjorg created a map including the Temple Mount proves nothing. That was his version, the current one is my version. What is perfectly acceptable to you, is not to me. (As far as I can recall, the original uploaded version of 2007-03-07 was the one Cybjorg made.) In nealry every map of the old city I have come across, the Muslim quarter is not merged with the Haram area. They are both distinct areas. I am sure the sources back this up. Chesdovi (talk) 13:05, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I repeat, for the date you're quoting, it clearly says "Author Original uploader was Chesdovi"! You can't lie your way out of this, it's pathetic. Just give up already!
 * I've already shown that it's acceptable, not only by the Muslim Quarter, but by the Armenian Quarter as well, to incorporate the Temple Mount within the Muslim Quarter. That talk about opinions is all well and good, but you don't really have a leg to stand on when you come to realise that the official Jerusalem census (this is the Statistical Yearbook of Jerusalem that's used by the Jerusalem Municipality themselves) and other official sites list it WITHIN the Muslim Quarter. On page 12 of the census, the old city is split into sub-quarters: 61-the Christian Quarter, 62-the Armenian Quarter, 63-the Jewish Quarter, 64-the Muslim Quarter. The other Quarters remain as they are, but the Muslim Quarter is then divided into three: 1-Ma'alot Ha-Midrashiyya, 2-Nablus Gate, and... wait for it... 3-Lions Gate St. and Temple Mount/Haram Ash-Sharif. Remember, this is the census used officially by Jerusalem, and it clearly indicates the Temple Mount/Haram Ash-Sharif is included within the Muslim Quarter.
 * As well as that, in case you need another example, the Israeli Ministry of Tourism site is quite specific in its statement identifying the Muslim Quarter as the location of the Dome of the Rock - "The most important sites in the Moslem Quarter are sacred sites for the Moslem faith such as the Dome of the Rock on Mount Moria (also a holy place for the Jews)."
 * Game, set, match. 82.17.236.83 (talk) 14:53, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

After some investigation work of my own, it seems that what I thought I had uploaded as Cybjorg’s version,, was in fact my version. As a file with a different name was added to the page on November 8, 2007, I thought that I had subsequently redone it at a later date and that the old version had been and the newer one had replaced it. I now notice that it was by a bot. Please do not accuse me of lying. I do not recall every edit I have or have not made over the years. But the point is moot. As you have demonstrated being sensitive to minute detail, I will point out to you that my first answer to Nableezy was not my actual reason for the modification. You will notice how I added a "?" after it, implying that "maybe it was because of this?". I did then proceed to explain my real intentions. Now back to the real matter at hand. The sources. You have done well in gleaning information from the official sites of the State of Israel. These support you stance. They also support the stance that East Jerusalem is part of Israeli Jerusalem, as are the settlements located in the West Bank within the Israeli Jerusalem Municipal borders. So if want to use these POV sources, we will have to be consistent and refer to Arab areas of East Jerusalem as "Arab-Israeli settlements". But let me bring another source in support of your view: Page 13 of The Politics of Sacred Space shows a table giving the total area of the Old City. It includes the Haram platform within the Muslim Quarter, which totals approx. 110 acres. Another source, the Foundation for Middle East Peace, also includes the Mount within the quarter, and gives the area of the Mount as 35 acres. The area of the space available for habitation is therefore approx. 75 acres. This smaller area of 75 acres is what other sources consider as the Muslim Quarter: “The Muslim Quarter covers 31 hectares (76 acres) in the north-eastern sector of the Old City”. (The Holy Land, page 29.) On page 19 of Jerusalem architecture, Ḳroyanḳer writes “The four sections created by the geometry of the main streets form the basis for the ethnic-religious quarters – Jewish, Muslim, Christian and Armenian….Architecturally speaking, moreover, there are really fives areas, the fifth being the Temple Mount, or Haram al-Sharif.” And on page 82 he writes “The Muslim Quarter has changed little over the centuries. Today, in an area of 75 acres….the Muslim Quarter is the Old City’s largest…”

The fact is that almost every map of the Old City has the Temple Mount outlined as an area by itself. Regarding the tiny map of the old city which appears on the File:Jerusalem Christian Quarter.jpg map and merges the two together; it has all but deleted the Temple mount form the Old City. It is not clear to anyone where it is situated. I don’t know why you kick up a fuss about the File:Jerusalem Muslim Quarter map.jpg image. The Temple Mount features prominently in it? Chesdovi (talk) 01:53, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Shfaram Ancient Synagogue
I noticed that another user recently added the Shfaram Ancient Synagogue to the ancient synagogues category. That category, to which there a number oof shuls that need to be added, is for "ancient" synagogues in the sense used by historians, i.e., no later than the sixth century CE. But I think we could usefully add several categories. "Nineteenth century synagogues in Israel" "Eighteenth century synagogues in Israel" and so forth going back. What do you think?Historicist (talk) 12:46, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * This synagogue was rebuilt in the 18th century on the site of an "ancient synagogue". But as no source provides how ancient this site is, the ancient synagogues category ahould be removed. It would be a good idea to add further cats specifying time periods, but I wouldn't limit it to Israel. Chesdovi (talk) 14:18, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

A Freilichen Purim!
What a charming note, it cheered my Purim. A freilichen Purim to you and yours.Historicist (talk) 16:24, 10 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Please forgive my slowness in responding to your very welcome Purim greetings. I could not have expressed my appreciation in any better words than the above.  May you be blessed at yom tov and all year 'round. Hertz1888 (talk) 02:59, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:6a2bkerestier.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:6a2bkerestier.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 05:20, 12 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi there, long time no see, wish all is well with you. Yamanam (talk) 10:25, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

seeking image of Reb Ahrele Roth
I'm seeking an image of Reb Ahrele Roth for a book project, and I see that you contributed an image to Wikipedia. Would you be so kind as to contact me by email: larry@yudel.com ? Thank you! Yudel (talk) 21:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

colourinthemeaning
this user comes to every page of a neighborhood of jerusalem and changes the lead sentence. is there anything you can do to contribut from your past history. thank you. 216.165.95.70 (talk) 10:53, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Image permission problem with Image:Chotkov kloiz.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Chotkov kloiz.jpg I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jay32183 (talk) 07:54, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Chotkov kloiz.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Chotkov kloiz.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 05:59, 12 May 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jay32183 (talk) 05:59, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Image permission problem with Image:Chotkov kloiz.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Chotkov kloiz.jpg I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jay32183 (talk) 21:06, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Chotkov kloiz.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Chotkov kloiz.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Jay32183 (talk) 21:35, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You got it backwards. Commons requires PD in the US and source country. Wikipedia requires PD in the US and not the source country. Copyrighted in the US and PD elsewhere does not meet standard. That template says "this image may not be public domain outside the United States". If it were public domain here and not the source country it's fine on Wikipedia. Jay32183 (talk) 06:21, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * If it was PD in the source country in 1996 then it's PD in the USA as well. -- Zsero (talk) 06:24, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Not the point I was trying to make. But with the PD-Ukraine, being published after 1946 but before 1951 would be public domain there but not in the US. Jay32183 (talk) 06:42, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Not so.  If it was PD in the Ukraine in 1996, which it was, then it's PD in the USA.  I don't know where you're getting this 1946 date from. -- Zsero (talk) 05:54, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It would have to have been published prior to January 1, 1946 to have been in the public domain in Ukraine in 1996. Have you actually read the license templates you use? Jay32183 (talk) 18:47, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you? The template says 1951.   Where are you getting this 1946 date from?  -- Zsero (talk) 05:45, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

You have to read the whole thing, even the small text on the bottom. Jay32183 (talk) 05:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Point taken. In this case it's irrelevant, because 1946 is also after the War.  -- Zsero (talk) 06:58, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Only if you refuse to understand the difference between date of creation and date of publication. A photo isn't published if it just sits in a photo album or hangs on a wall. The date the picture became available to the public is what's relevant, and we don't know that. An image with this tag should be a candidate to transfer to Commons, but this would be deleted from there for not having proper publication information. Jay32183 (talk) 08:36, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Where do you imagine the yizkor book could have got it from, if it wasn't published elsewhere first?  Merely looking at the image is enough to show that it's a reproduction of an earlier publication, and when could that publication have happened if not before the War?  -- Zsero (talk) 21:50, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yizkor could have easily been the first publication, especially if the publishers didn't specify where they got it. Being able to see an image doesn't mean it has previously been published. If I wrote a book you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a previously published image and an original image, unless you had a publication history of the image. Jay32183 (talk) 07:30, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You appear to be arguing in bad faith. I can only repeat what I wrote above: Merely looking at the image is enough to show that it's a reproduction of an earlier publication. How your answer is in any way responsive to that is a mystery to me.  I would also like to know where you think the editors of the yizkor-book could have got this image if it had not been published before the War.  Do you think one of them carried it in his pocket the whole time?  By the way, the book in question is a yizkor-book; its title is not "Yizkor".  -- Zsero (talk) 17:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

My argument makes no assumption of faith. Looking at the image does not confirm that it has previously been published. I'm not sure you understand what the word "published" means. It may not have been in a pocket, but that does not mean there was any means of releasing the image to the public. I can access hundreds of photographs that have never been published, not including ones I've taken myself. There is more than one Yizkor book and each published in separate countries. We can't say Yizkor book as publication history unless we know exactly which one. Jay32183 (talk) 01:39, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You just don't get it, do you? -- Zsero (talk) 03:33, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I fully understand, you're the one who doesn't get it. It is impossible to know the publication date of an image just by looking at the image. Check Wikipedia Signpost/2008-08-11/Dispatches. I am well aware of the Wikipedia policies and guidelines relevant to this situation. You appear to be just insisting something is true, which contradicts WP:V and WP:RS, which still apply to images, especially with claims of public domain. Jay32183 (talk) 19:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * And you still don't get it. Looking at this image won't tell you its original publication date, but it will tell you that it's a reproduction from an earlier publication.   A little common sense will tell you that that publication had to have been before the War. If this photo was not published before the War, where would the yizkor-book's editors have got it?  Did they carry it in their pockets through the War?  -- Zsero (talk) 05:01, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * What you're claiming does not make any sense, and disregards WP:V and WP:RS. You cannot tell when the image was published by looking at it. You can't tell if it was previously published by looking at it. It could have been hanging on some one's wall or sitting in a photo album. Those are plausible scenarios. Did you read the dispatch I linked to? I'm telling you what Wikipedia policy is and you're saying "look at it, you can tell." Your word is not a reliable source. The source we have only indicates a publication in the 1990s. You can't get before 1946 with the 1990s. Based on the sources we have the website is the first publication, since they don't indicate getting it from anywhere else. Learn the policy before you start telling people they don't understand. Your argument is based on nothing. And for the last time, stop saying the war. If you want to indicate a time period say which war. Say "World War II", not "the war", if you want it to mean anything. We do not have any indication that this the image was published prior to World War II. Jay32183 (talk) 05:14, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Where is the rule that all PD images have to be PD in USA stated? Chesdovi (talk) 16:06, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:PD and several other places. Wikipedia has to follow US copyright law because the servers and the foundation are in the US. Jay32183 (talk) 19:06, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it is safe to provide US PD rational for this image saying that the image must have been published before 1946 for the building was destroyed in 1942-1944. Chesdovi (talk) 23:09, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

A question for you
When there is a particularly clear case in which the an Arab village, such as Kafr Bir'im, was built on the site of an ancient Jewish village, such as Kfar Bar'am - should the page say so? I just added this info to Kafr Bir'im, but now I am not sure. what do you think?Historicist (talk) 21:43, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I have come across this problem before with regards to locations in Israel/West Bank. There does not seem to be a consensus on the matter. I am of the opinion that there should be one page detailing a location which has been known by different names historically. In this case it seems that Kafr Bir'im & Kfar Bar'am are the same place and therefore the two pages should be merged. (The page name will be controversial). As Bar'am is located some distance from the old village, it "deserves" its own page. Chesdovi (talk) 23:04, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

New article
Allegations of antisemitism in the United Nations. Your comments and contributions are welcome. Best, Jalapenos do exist (talk) 01:19, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Biblical Gardens
Lists vs. category. There are a lot of Biblical Gardens, some quite notable. What are the merits of collecting such articles as a list vs. a category. The two types of lists/collections appear to overlap.Historicist (talk) 17:48, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * See Categories, lists, and navigation templates. Regards, Chesdovi (talk) 16:48, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Eliezer Berland
Hi, I noticed your recent edits to this article under "Categories." I understand why you deleted "Category:Breslov Hasidism" in favor of the subcategory, "Breslov rabbis." I'm just wondering if I should remove all the other Breslov rabbis from "Category:Breslov Hasidism," too? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 13:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that's how its supposed to be. Chesdovi (talk) 22:09, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Rabbi Aryeh Levin.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Rabbi Aryeh Levin.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Damiens .rf 18:20, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

New category
Hi, I see you're busy creating new categories. I like the new "Sephardic Haredi rabbis in Israel". But re: "American Haredi rabbis", I wonder if people like Chaim Michael Dov Weissmandl even belong there. Rav Weissmandl was a "Slovakian Haredi rabbi" who moved to America. The original category title, "Haredi rabbis in the United States", didn't imply nationality as much as location, whereas the newer title does imply nationality. Yoninah (talk) 20:21, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Yoninah, Gut Voch! I did not create the "Sephardic Haredi rabbis in Israel" category, and personally I think it is unnecessary. Regarding the change from Category:Haredi rabbis in the United States and Category:Haredi rabbis in America to Category:American Haredi rabbis: it is to bring into line this category with all the other "American" categories. Agreed, the old category did not necessarily imply nationality, but that not an issue here, as any person who lived in a certain country for a long period would have attained that country's citizenship. That is why someone like Chaim Michael Dov Weissmandl is listed as being Hungarian, Slovakian and American. Furthermore, a category named "Haredi rabbis in the United States" may imply that he was in America, but not long enough to become an American citizen which would not be of importance to categorise; therefore, just because a person spent a short time in the UK or any other county does not mean we should list him as a British rabbi or as a "Haredi rabbi in the United Kingdom" as that type of categorising is too intricate. We could add the following category to him: Category:Slovak Americans or Category:Hungarian immigrants to the United States. Chesdovi (talk) 21:25, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks, now I understand what you're doing. Before you list Rav Weissmandl under "Slovak Americans" or "Hungarian immigrants", though, I think we should find out if he really did get American citizenship. Kol tuv, Yoninah (talk) 21:23, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Immigrants to Israel categories
Hi Chesdovi. I'm afraid I've reverted quite a few of your category changes - you've added several people to the Russian immigrants to Israel category even though they were not actually Russian - several were born in what is Ukraine, and by the time they immigrated they were actually USSR citizens, not Russians. I'm aware of all the specific country categories, but for some people you can't really categoruse them specifically (like Shalom Cohen - he immigrated from Egypt, but it's unclear if he was even an Egyptian citizen or not). пﮟოьεԻ  5  7  22:04, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Question
Your opinion, please. Would you call this article Sant'Anna, Trani, since the building is now a church, or or Scolagrande synagogue, since it was built as a medieval synagogue? The Great Mosque of Cordoba is now a cathedral and Hagia Sophia is called Hagia Sophia.Historicist (talk) 13:19, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I would call the article "St. Anne's Church, Trani" with the lead reading:
 * St. Anne's Church, Trani (Italian: Chiesa di Sant’Anna) located in Trani, Italy, originally housed the Scolagrande Synagogue during the medieval period.
 * ...or something along those lines. Chesdovi (talk) 14:16, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Rav Chaim Joseph Gottlieb of Stropkov
Hi there, I saw that you contributed to the article about Rav Chaim Joseph Gottlieb of Stropkov. I am a descandant of the Rav and wanted to ask you if you are too or if you have any other relationship to Stropkov or the Gottlieb family.

Thank you and Shana Tova! Felix

(you can email me at fesky22188@web.de) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fesky22188 (talk • contribs) 09:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Question
Why did you remove Category:Judaism from the article about Avraham Qanai? Karaite Judaism is an important historical and modern movement of Judaism, and Avraham Qanai has published books about modern Karaism. Therefore, I disagree with this edit. --AFriedman (talk) 12:42, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It is too gerneral a category. For the same reason, we also don't categorise him under Category:People. Chesdovi (talk) 12:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay. There don't seem to be other people under that category, at least when I checked. --AFriedman (talk) 15:45, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Category nominated for deletion
The category Loopholes in Jewish law, which you nominated for speedy deletion, did not meet any of the criteria, so I opened a discussion at CFD instead. You may wish to comment; in particular, another user has asked that articles previously removed from the category be restored. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 19:22, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Neat
Re this: my mom has said something along those lines for years now. Thanks for the addition.  T i a m u t talk 13:28, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Abraham of Montpellier
Hi Chesdovi! You recently added Abraham of Montpellier to 2 categories of 12th century people. According to the (basically unsourced) article, he was niftar in 1315 (probably from the Hebrew wiki), so it is unlikely that he lived in the 1100's. The reason I'm asking is because there seems to be some confusion as to when he lived, and if Solomon of Montpellier was his son. The article itself is contradictory (and duly tagged such), and I was wondering if you had any further info that influenced you to categorize him as such.

Also, the article is tagged as possibly not meeting WP:BIO. According to the guideline (if I understand correctly), anyone who made a significant contribution in his field is noteworthy. What do you think?

Thanks, Keyed In (talk) 15:25, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Thanks for pointing that out! Chesdovi (talk) 16:33, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * No prob. Any thoughts on the notability question? Keyed In (talk) 18:11, 23 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I see you took care of that too...and the confusion. Thanks. Keyed In (talk) 18:25, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind my asking, but if I understand correctly, Solomon's father was Abraham ben Shmuel. The one who wrote chidushim and the mistakenly attributed Tosofos Ri Hazaken was Avraham ben Yitzchok, known as Avraham min Hahar. Besides that, we now have a third "stam" Abraham of Montpellier, whose entire article is taken from the Encyclopedia Judaica Jewish Encyclopedia, who was mistakenly thought to be the father of Solomon. How do we know that these last two are not the same one?? Did you have any other source, besides for the confusion as to Solomon's father, that there were two (other) people by this name?

Thanks Keyed In (talk) 19:53, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I do not have any other sources. I would assume they are different people because Abraham ben Yitzchak of Montpellier died in 1315. Abraham of Montpellier was a contemporary of Solomon ben Abraham of Montpellier who lived in the early-mid 1200's. Also, various details about Abraham ben Yitzchak of Montpellier were not refered to by the JE in the Abraham of Montpellier article, which points to the notion that they are indeed different people. I think Artscroll has a book about the Rishonim which may clear up this confusion. Chesdovi (talk) 21:49, 23 September 2009 (UTC)


 * OK I'll see what I can find out. If there are really three, it may be worthwhile to move Abraham of Montpellier to a more specific name, and disambig there to all three. Thanks for clarifying. Keyed In (talk) 06:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Talis bag
You can go ahead with the merge. Overwhelming support. Like the counterpart of wp:snow. Debresser (talk) 22:56, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you going to do the merger? I seem to remember there was an ananymous green light for this. Debresser (talk) 14:04, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes. But first I wanted to read and understand fully SNOWBALL. I just haven't had a chance yet. Chesdovi (talk) 14:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, don't worry about that. If I tell you it's ok, you can believe me. With a certain measure of wp:iar, of course. Debresser (talk) 14:18, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Sephardi Jews Mosaic
You are right that the almost total absence of Sephardi women in the photobox is pressing. I suggest that we add another line to it (6 slots), three will be saved for Nobel winners (of those, one would be Rita Levi) and the rest will be saved for women only. This way we will have 5 women in the photobox, not an equal number -but a reasonable representation.--Gilisa (talk) 12:21, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Clarify
If I may ask, you are a religious Jew, aren't you? Debresser (talk) 13:37, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Is there any movement in Judaism that you have a problem with? Debresser (talk) 13:40, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Are you a religious Chabadnik? Chesdovi (talk) 13:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


 * If you'll allow me to practise an old Jewish custom, I'd like to answer with a counterquestion. Have you seen my userpage? Debresser (talk) 14:05, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes. It has more userboxes than mine. Chesdovi (talk) 14:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * We strive to please. Your userboxes are very original. Debresser (talk) 14:17, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Judaising Jerusalem
FYI, I went ahead and declined your speedy nomination of the above category. It doesn't seem to fall into the CSD criteria - and while I don't mind making IAR deletions if it seems uncontroversial, it'd be best to take this to WP:CFD. Jamie  S93  14:20, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Mass removal of cats
What is the reason? ShamWow (talk) 23:04, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Bordom. Do you refer to anything specific? Chesdovi (talk) 23:09, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Too many to mention. You've also completely emptied certain categories, including Category:Palestinian mass murderers. If you're going to simply eliminate every entry, submit the entire category for deletion. ShamWow (talk) 23:34, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I proceeded to empty Category:Palestinian mass murderers because Category:Mass murderers states: This category is not to be used for terrorists. Chesdovi (talk) 23:42, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Category removals
Hi Chesdovi, you seem to be removing lots of articles from Category:Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including Exodus from Lydda and Ramla. Can you say why? SlimVirgin talk| contribs 23:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi SlimVirgin. Exodus from Lydda and Ramla is a good example. It is categorised under Category:1948 Palestinian exodus which is itself a sub-cat of Category:Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We don't generally advise over-catergorisation. Chesdovi (talk) 23:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed. See Categorisation. Debresser (talk) 23:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, fair enough. I've never really agreed with the duplicate categorization rule (i.e. don't have articles in the main cat and the subs), because it can lead to things being so tightly categorized that no one can find them. But I'll give in gracefully and go along with it. :) SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 04:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Cheeseburger photo
I can't believe you think a cheeseburger with bacon is an appropriate photo for a page on Kashrut. It turns the whole article into a joke.--Gilabrand (talk) 10:51, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Why is it any different from the image in Shaving in Judaism? Chesdovi (talk) 12:08, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It looks like there is a difference of opinion on the matter of such photos: Talk:Activities prohibited on Shabbat. Chesdovi (talk) 12:21, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Maimonides_no_peyos.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Maimonides_no_peyos.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Chris G Bot (talk) 00:15, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The info was right there. It just wasn't in the form of a template; I put the braces around it, not that they're necessary, but they don't hurt and maybe they'll keep the bot away.  -- Zsero (talk) 02:31, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Favor to ask
Hi Chesdovi. I'd like to ask you a favor. When you add notability tags to Palestinian villages depopulated in 1948, would you mind leaving a note for people at WP:PALESTINE? Not all those articles are watchlisted (at least not by me) so it might help to bring editor attention to address the request for more sources if you do that. Thanks for considering this request.  T i a m u t talk 14:37, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Solomon's Temple
Shalom, Chesdovi. Would you be able to shed light on the contradictory dating just introduced into the Solomon's Temple article? Perhaps you would know how to account for, explain or even resolve the ambiguity (if there is a way). Thanks in advance for having a look. Hertz1888 (talk) 06:39, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Questions and answers
I have moved your questions and the answers you got to your talkpage, please direct any further of these types of questions to WP Sudan, WP Yemen and WP Kurdistan. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 12:25, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I am putting them back as Huon's subsequent comments refer to them. Chesdovi (talk) 13:18, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

November 2009
Please do not use talk pages for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article. They are not to be used as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. ''You have already been told by more than ine editor that these questions are not relevant. Please don't disrupt a talk page to prove a point.'' RolandR 14:35, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Villages destroyed in Lebanon, 1860
I don't think it likely that your question on Talk:List of Syrian towns and villages destroyed by Israel will be answered there, and my advice would be to remove it yourself, since it's obviously irrelevant to that article. If you really are interested in such a list, may I suggest trying the talk pages of such articles as 1860 Lebanon conflict itself, History of Lebanon or History of Syria, or try the talk pages of the corresponding WikiProjects (Lebanon, Syria, maybe military history and its Lebanese military history task force)? The reference desk may also be helpful; at least the people there might have an idea where to look for further information. Huon (talk) 01:26, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for directing me to the relevant pages. I would be inclined to leave my question where I originally posted it as it's not totally irrelevant; (I would agree that a query on Exploding whale would be though.) The people involved and interested in the destroyed syrian villages which occured during 1967-1973 may also have infomation to hand and know about those destroyed in the 1860 riots. I see no compelling reason to remove it. Chesdovi (talk) 10:00, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Re:Arabic translation
Sorry man... unfortunately, I can't read Arabic. I recommend you ask Fjmustak. Hopefully he could help ;). --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:42, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Simple answer to your question: Laziness. Maybe I will overcome the disease one day... Cheers! --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:03, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Joseph's Tomb
Hi Chesdovi, I can only make out the first line (the dark part).... It says "هذا نبي الله سيدنا يوسف عليه السلام", this is God's prophet our lord Joseph peace be upon him. --Fjmustak (talk) 06:01, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, the more popular (per Google hits) English translation of "sayyiduna" is our master (this, this, this, and this) rather than our lord... It corresponds with adoneinu (אדוננו) in Hebrew. --Fjmustak (talk) 08:03, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:40 Jerusalem Songs.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:40 Jerusalem Songs.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 23:39, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bat Yerushalayim.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Bat Yerushalayim.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 23:39, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:30 Years of Pirchei Yerushalayim.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:30 Years of Pirchei Yerushalayim.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 23:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ratziti Sheteyda 2005.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Ratziti Sheteyda 2005.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 23:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Shirim Hasidi 2005.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Shirim Hasidi 2005.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 23:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Shirim Mizrachi 2005.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Shirim Mizrachi 2005.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 23:41, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Noladiti El Hamanginot.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Noladiti El Hamanginot.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 23:41, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Abraham of Montpellier
Hi again. In Rabbi Blau's first publishing (here) of Chidushei Rabeinu Avraham min Hahar on Yevamos, he cites a teshuva by Isaac de Lattes who was quoted as doing the same in the Abraham of Montpellier JE article. This proves that they were really the same person, so I merged them back together. Keyed In (talk) 12:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Category:English Jews of the Medieval and Tudor period
Hi Chesdovi, I note that you have today removed the articles on Jacob of Orléans, Yom Tov of Joigny and Hagin ben Moses from the above category and would be grateful to know your rationale, as I believe that the category had been correctly applied to all three individuals. Jacob of Orléans had lived in England at least 18 years prior to his murder by the mob, Yom Tov of Joigny, also known as Yom Tov of York, and had also lived in England some time from to his death in the York Massacre and Hagin ben Moses was Presbyter Judaeorum, the highest office for English Jews during the Medieval period. Davshul (talk) 13:13, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * See above. Category:English Medieval rabbis is itself a sub-category of Category:English Jews of the Medieval and Tudor period. It seems excessive to list pages in all categories. Should Yom Tov of Joigny be also categorised under Category:English Jews, Category:Jews and Judaism in England, Category:Jews and Judaism in the United Kingdom, Category:Jews and Judaism in Europe, etc? I must admit though, that I haven’t quite got my head round the Duplicate Categorization Rule. The same applies to Rodrigo Lopez (physician). You should really have waited for my response before going ahead and reverting my edits. Chesdovi (talk) 13:41, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I note your comment regarding the number of prolification of categories and consider one of the largest sources of duplication are the English categories vis-a-vis the British/UK categories. Although I am still looking into the full ramifications, it is my intention (amongst others) to propose the merger of the Category:English Jews into Category:British Jews, as I can see no justification for the former category. However, the only English Jews that do not fit into Category:British Jews are those of the medieval period, which is the reason for the existnce of Category:English Jews of the Medieval and Tudor period. In the example given by you, the number of categories for Yom Tov of Joigny it will ultimately be reduced.
 * Regarding the English/British Jews categories, you should confer with the creator of the category to understand their reasoning for its creation. I would also consider renaming the English Medieval rabbis category to Medieval rabbis in England. In an era when English citizenship did not exist, this would cover foreingers who immigrated. Who says Yom Tov of Joigny was actually English? Chesdovi (talk) 15:03, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * As regards the various Medieval physicians categories, the parent category pages specifically state that physicians appearing in the subcategories also appear in the parent category, which enable users to have a clear view of, say, the list of Medieval Spanish physicians and and the list of Medieval Jewish physicians, without Medieval Jewish Spanish physicians being excluded due to their listing in a sub-category. I believe that the subcategories in this instance can justifiably be considered as distinguished subcategories as defined by Duplicate Categorization Rule, thus permitting the duplication. Davshul (talk) 14:28, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * If you are referring to Category:Medieval physicians, I think you misread the boxed note you added on 17/09/09, which states "it should only contain subcategories". Chesdovi (talk) 15:03, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I was not referring to the banner, but to the wording in the subcategories immediately below Category:Medieval physicians, which states that "Physicians listed in the following subcategories also appear in the main list below". Davshul (talk) 15:14, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I do not see it? Chesdovi (talk) 15:46, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Signing off for now - kids arrived - lighting the candles - Chanukah Sameach. 16:18, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for work on Judeo- Christian subjects.
I have needed to read a lot of information on Jews, Middle - east and Judaism lately, thanks to you I find all the information I need.



Estoniankaiju has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

(Estoniankaiju (talk) 02:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC))

P.S Have you noticed the world runs On Israels watch (figuratively).

NowCommons: File:Vilna Synagogue West.JPG
File:Vilna Synagogue West.JPG is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Vilna Synagogue West.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:42, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Regarding my undos to your change in Category edits
I didn't see that you added them to the Orthodox Jewish Anti-Zionism category after removing them from the Jewish Anti-Zionism category. I thought you had simply removed them.

All of my undos of your category swap have been undone themselves, leaving the articles in the Orthodox Jewish Anti-Zionism category, as you had placed them.

Sorry for the mix-up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TPaineTX (talk • contribs) 21:58, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Your removals of wps
You've removed wps of people who have been covered by RSs for their being Jewish ballplayers, including for example Scott Feldman who just won Jewish pitcher of the year. That's not appropriate, and I will be reverting them to be within the wikiprojects that they've been in for some time now. Please don't delete any more.--Epeefleche (talk) 17:15, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * A person's Jewish ethnicity has nothing to do with WikiProject Judaism which clearly states: "This WikiProject aims to standardize Wikipedia articles on Judaism, Halakha ("Jewish law" and tradition) and other subjects and phenomena that are directly related to Judaism as a religion ." Chesdovi (talk) 17:18, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

The project has, from time immemorial that I can think of, covered Jews. The first category in the wikiproject under "categories" is "Jews". These articles fall within that category. There are books on Jewish athletes, and Jewish baseball players, and a Jewish major leaguers committee, and awards given out for being the best Jewish batter and pitcher. This isn't just about the practice of the religion, or about Jewish law. Jews per se in various endeavors are -- be virtue of their religion -- directly related to Judaism as a religion. This ballplayers have been included in the wikiproject for years.--Epeefleche (talk) 17:28, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * We will have to bring this up at the Discussion Board. Chesdovi (talk) 17:36, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Up or down
If you look at the page for Wikiproject Israel, you will see the scale. If I am not mistaken, it goes from GA to A to FA, which means I have upgraded the article, in the hopes that someone will submit it for Featured Article Review. It is high time we have more featured articles about Israel and Jewish subjects. At the moment, the situation is very grim.--Gilabrand (talk) 12:29, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Hurva Synagogue review
Hi, I assumed you wanted me to peer review Hurva Synagogue, but I see it is already at WP:FAC. If I review an article at FAC, I do not just "skim through it". I can try to review it, but it will take me several days at least before I have the time to do so. Is this what you want? Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:37, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * In that case, I would suggest leaving it for the time being. Another editor seems to be on the case! Thanks for responding. Regards, Chesdovi (talk) 21:49, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Chesdovi, I removed the first set, but you replaced them with a different set of templates at Featured article candidates/Hurva Synagogue/archive1 to mark items done in color. Templates cause the FAC archives to exceed Template limits; when you want to mark something done, could you please just put one note at the end of the reviewer comments, rather than breaking them up and causing a lengthy FAC with templates?  That would help, thanks a lot, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 00:16, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * has a topic ban, which seems to be on all articles related to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Since the synagogue was destroyed in one of the wars of this conflict, my guess is that it would also fall under the topic ban. I suggest you ask, who blocked her most recently. As an admin, I do not wp:wheel war. Sorry, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 00:28, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Chesdovi (talk) 00:33, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * There are people who are willing to help do copyedits listed at PR/V and WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:03, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Al Al - what source?
"Al Al is now (1994) "abandoned"" ? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 13:09, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hurva bimah.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Hurva bimah.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.


 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.


 * If you recieved this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.


 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:38, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Hurva sideview.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Hurva sideview.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:20, 14 March 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 13:20, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Chin up....
PS: Rule numero uno on Featured Article production...sort the content out first. Admittedly I've broken my own rules sometimes :/ Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:11, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Centenarians: Rav Elyashiv
Does Rav Elyashiv really have the דין of a centenarians, because even though it passed his Hebrew birthday (1 Nissan), למעשה his Secular birthday is April 10th which hasn't yet passed? Just some food for thought. Keep up the good work! ;) --רח"ק | Talk | Contribs 16:06, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I've raised this question at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)... I think it's worth clarifying in terms of the overall policy. Canadian   Paul  02:53, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

ANI
You are mentioned in ANI http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Deleting_content_in_Criticism_of_Judaism_without_prior_discussion --Noleander (talk) 19:58, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Please clarify
The categories that were removed are for use in container categories which are categories that should only contain subcategories and not individual articles. The two in your example were decided to be container categories in a CfD discussion. BTW, you may want to consider using a bot to archive some of the older material on your talk page. Vegaswikian (talk) 16:45, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

"primary" note to page
Shalom;, i noticed you placed a request for references (or an improvement thereof) on the page "giving of the foreleg cheeks and abomasum", are you able to please specify what is it that you feel needs to be "tweaked" on the page?

thanks alot וערב שבת שלום!Marecheth Ho&#39;eElohuth (talk) 17:28, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

List of Hasidic dynasties
Hi, the Tolna Hasidut is from Ukraine, not Hungary. Yoninah (talk) 13:05, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Jerusalem
On Talk:Jerusalem, we have come to a final decision on a collage. If you wish to, then please do the honors.-- RM ( Be my friend ) 16:42, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for all of your help. By the way, could you spare a few tips on how to make my own collages? Please?-- RM ( Be my friend ) 19:16, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

To tell you the truth, I have absolutely no idea how its done.-- RM ( Be my friend ) 20:54, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I currently live in California, and I have only been to Netanya and Lod.-- RM ( Be my friend ) 21:08, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:4 syn jeru.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:4 syn jeru.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:01, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Haifa
Hey, Chesdovi, since you seem to be one of our collage masters, would you please make one for Haifa? It should have one, since it is a major city and the third largest in Israel, and you seem like an expert.-- RM ( Be my friend ) 16:46, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

OK, thank's for the tip. I'll try to get the hang of it.

Yehoshua Landau
Hi Chesdovi: You edited the Rabbi Yehoshua Landau which is now being questioned. Please take a look at it and see if you can add to it and improve it. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 07:14, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Naeh
First of all let me tall you that your reverts on that article are not appreciated. As you will see if you take the trouble to look it up, the Wikipedia guideline is that we may have honorifics once, see Honorifics where it says "This guideline permits inline use of honorific titles that in general have significant sourced usage or recognition", and not to repeat them afterwards, see Honorifics. In addition, unsourced categories don't have to be removed if they are likely to be true. In this case you are appearently ignorant of the fact that he was a Chabad rabbi. So look it up! See e.g., and. The first lines of both these articles tell you all you need to know. Want better sources? Go look for them! Debresser (talk) 18:44, 8 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Don't you think that going on a sprey of removing the word "Rabbi" from the first line of articles after you read my post is rather going for conflict? Don't you think you should at least try to prove that my arguments are wrong? This is definitely a big minus for you. Debresser (talk) 20:57, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.


 * The discussion is at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Not sure why Debresser didn't give you the full link to the section. Jayjg (talk) 05:04, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I just copied, as instructed there. No reason to look for hidden motives. Debresser (talk) 07:20, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The template you used has an explicit variable for "thread", which you apparently did not fill in. Jayjg <small style="color:darkgreen;">(talk) 03:05, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I just pasted it from the WP:ANI page, where there are no parameters included. Debresser (talk) 07:42, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Since we are now agreed to discuss this, Please have a look at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(Hebrew) where I raised the subject. I saw what you and others wrote on WP:ANI, but still think that there is reason to make a specific guideline that should be added there. I noticed that project page is not too well visited, so I'll post a few notices here and there. See you. Debresser (talk) 15:19, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Real estate
In case you every move to Bloomington, this is now a private home. Kinda makes you want to violate the 10th commandment. Moses Montefiore Congregation cheers.OldShul (talk) 20:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Maon Synagogue
just fyi.OldShul (talk) 14:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I also created an article on Oldest synagogues in Israel. A surprising number of people believe that all synagogue post-date the destruction.OldShul (talk) 21:46, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

ANI
An ANI discussion has been started that involves you. You may wish to go and leave a response there. Silver seren C 00:45, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Holon
Hello again, Chesdovi! I accidentally (and completely) screwed up Holon, and can't fix it. Could you please spread the word and do what you can? Thanks!-- RM ( Be my friend ) 05:53, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Jacob Ettlinger.jpg
A tag has been placed on File:Jacob Ettlinger.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

The file is reloaded to Wikimedia

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the page and leave a note on  explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. lkitross (talk) 20:25, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Jacob Ettlinger.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Jacob Ettlinger.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:17, 30 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — ξ <sup style="color:#000000;">xplicit  22:17, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Hurva synagogue
Gorgeous picture! (Did you stand on someone's roof to take it?) Yoninah (talk) 15:38, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yup. Beit El Synagogue! Chesdovi (talk) 15:54, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes the article is steadily improving...but..um, why did you blank the page for over ten minutes? Also it'd be good to find a spot for the old infobox image. Nice photo. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:51, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Teffilin on Chol a Mo'ed
Just looked on your UP, where it's written you lay teffilin on Chol A'Moe'd. Isn't it forbiden? Just out of ceriousity. Rgds--89.138.157.172 (talk) 13:17, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Gaza flotilla raid edits
Take a peek at this: Talk:Gaza_flotilla_raid --Kslotte (talk) 14:08, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

WP Single Event
We have pages for Solomos Solomou and Tassos Isaac though there are notifiable for only one event, for being kiled by Turkish Army or Turkish nationalists. These men are considered as national heros in Cyprus, and the 9 people died in Mavi Marmara are considered as national hero in Turkey, it is decided that their names should be given to streets in Ankara. I think the cases are very similar regarding Single Event Policy. 12:24, 19 June 2010 (UTC)Kavas (talk)
 * Those Greek people and the circumstances surrounding thier deaths became iconic. These people deaths are documented fully in the main article about the floitlla. That incident gave them notabilty. They surely do not deseve their own page! Totally unwareented. Thats why I suggested Muhammed edh-Dhib be merged to Qumran Caves. Chesdovi (talk) 09:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Those Turkish people are as iconic as Solomos Solomou and Tassos Isaac.Kavas (talk) 14:13, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Not iconic, (yet?); just national martys, like the numerous Hamas shahids who don't have their own pages. Chesdovi (talk) 14:26, 21 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Because, there are many Hamas suicide bombers and their deaths are not significant. The first female shahid of PKK, (suicide bomber), Zeynep Kınacı (in Kurdish Zilan) has her own page in German Wikipedia, though she is not even a national martyr, banned DTP took only %4-5 vote (15-20% of Turkey's population are Kurds) and not all DTP members support violence: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeynep_K%C4%B1nac%C4%B1. Similarly, 309 Cypriots were killed and there are 909 missing in 1974 Cyprus invasion by TSK and those missing and killed people don't have their own pages, but Solomos Solomou and Tassos Isaac have. The people are iconic because it is the only event in which Turkish citizens are killed by a foreign army in history (http://www.tgrthaber.com/news_view.aspx?guid={C4BF6C28-3C6D-4A48-A4BA-19E372DC343B} ) as stated by Prof. Davutoğlu. Furkan's name will be given to streets and parks in Uskudar and Sincan: http://www.haber34.com/furkan-doganin-adi-uskudarda-bir-sokaga-verilecek-23116-haberi.html, http://www.flasgazetesi.com.tr/haberDetayMiddle.asp?ID=18220 Kavas (talk) 12:32, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

RfC for Israeli settlements
Though I find your argument here problematic, I invite you to add your name to the list of editors endorsing my statement/proposal on the same page. --GHcool (talk) 18:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Question for you
Here --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:05, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Gilad Shalit 4 years in Hamas captivity
Can you please help to edit: http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Gilad_Shalit_4_years_in_Hamas_captivity —Preceding unsigned comment added by Conan (talk • contribs) 22:10, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:4 syn jeru.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:4 syn jeru.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:42, 25 June 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:42, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:4 syn jeru.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:4 syn jeru.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:42, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Discussion at WP:Judaism
I moved the discussion "Should every BIO of a Jew be part of Wikiproject Judaism", which you recently participated in, to the talk page of WP Judaism's MOS. This is an important subject and needs to be incorporated into the MOS once we reach a consensus.  -shirulashem (talk) 18:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Jerusalem
Hello Chesdovi, There had been agreement on the talk page not to include either the Israeli flag or the Palestinian flag in the infobox in Jerusalem. Also, it is a near unanimous view that western Jerusalem is within Israeli territory and that East Jerusalem is within the Palestinian territories. The UK is one of the few exceptions to this view, in that they recognized de facto control of western Jerusalem by Israel and East Jerusalem by Jordan following the 48 war but refused to recognize any de jure sovereignty over the city by either party. The UK currently considers EJ to be occupied territory. See here. But most states and sources agree that EJ is within the Palestinian territories. But either way, you reinserted the Israeli flag where there had been consensus to not have it. Could you please remove it? <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 15:57, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure. You refer to Dailycare's last post here I presume? Most states do not agree that EJ is PT, or that WJ is part of Israel. They just allocate these parts to each side in a final settlement. But currently the legal status is that of the CS plan, no? See Positions on Jerusalem. Chesdovi (talk) 17:07, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Most governments currently agree that EJ is Palestinian territory that can only be ceded through a treaty between the PLO and Israel. The UK is an exception in that it still holds the view that legally the entirety of Jerusalem is a corpus separatum, but even then the UK accepts that Israel has "de facto authority" over WJ. It does consider EJ occupied by Israel, explicitly rejecting any claim of Israeli sovereignty over that territory. As far as I can tell, the UK does not claim that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to WJ but says they apply to EJ. Various UN bodies, such as OCHA or the WHO, repeatedly define the occupied Palestinian territories as including East Jerusalem, see here. The UN page on the permanent observer of Palestine defines the oPt as including EJ (see here. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 18:36, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * What these bodies claim is a legal fallacy. I quote from POJ: "According to a report prepared for and under the guidance of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, it would appear that the UN has maintained that until the final status of the city is agreed by the parties involved, the legal status of the city remains a corpus separatum." It would further appear that the repeated distinction of "including EJ" when reference is made to the OPT, indicates it is viewed as a separate entity. (or is this b/c Israel took the further action of "annexation"?) Chesdovi (talk) 11:18, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * This would be OR on my part, but the reason that I think they say "including EJ" is to emphasize that EJ is occupied and that Israel's annexation is illegitimate. I've read the report that is cited in the POJ article, and it does in fact make that point. However, it makes some leaps that I dont think are accurate. It cites a number of UN resolutions following the 67 war about Israeli attempts to change the status of the city, and makes the leap that "status of the city" can only mean copus separatum due to the acceptance of the partition plan. However, it does not cite any resolutions after 48 but prior to 67. I dont see how resolutions challenging the legitimacy of any moves to change the status post-67 as proof that "status" refers to the partition plan's designation. There were no condemnations, as far as I am aware (and I may well be wrong), when Israel declared its capital to be Jerusalem when Israel did not occupy East Jerusalem. In fact, prior to that a number of states maintained their embassies in western Jerusalem, following the declaration of annexation of EJ and the UNSC resolution that followed they withdrew. As to what housing would be "illegal" in EJ, as you raised in your es on Silwan, that can be a bit complicated. There is wide agreement that construction for the purpose of increasing Israeli presence in EJ is illegal under international law, but what about local building codes and other such laws? I'm not sure. Article 64 of the 4th Geneva Convention says that the occupying power must maintain the prior penal law, but I dont think building codes fall under "penal law" and I do not know what rights, if any, Israel has to change past building codes. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 02:21, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Hezekiah's Tunnel
It runs form Kidron to siloam pool under the City of David. Silwan was uninhabited until the early Christin monks moved into the tombs. And lay entirely on the eastern slope of the valley, farming villagers not wanting to build on the arable valley floor.Broad Wall (talk) 13:40, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

OK - but how much? There is an entire Wikipedia page on City of David, and it is woefully brief and inadequate. I've been meaning to get back to it. If everything in {{City of David]] is added to Silwan, why have two pages? On this theory, I had been putting on the Silwan page only those ruins that are actually underneath the village site, i.e., the ancient tombs. although even there, I am putting most of the info on the page Rock-cut tombs in ancient Israel. Broad Wall (talk) 13:57, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Yosef Shalom Eliashiv
Hello. In March you added a citation to a book from the "Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases" series published by Icon Group International to this article. Unfortunately, Icon Group International is not a reliable source - their books are computer-generated, with most of the text copied from Wikipedia (most entries have [WP] by them to indicate this, see e.g. ). I've only removed the reference, not the text it was referencing. I'm removing a lot of similar references as they are circular references; many other editors have also been duped by these sources. Despite giving an appearance of reliability, the name "Webster's" has been public domain since the late 19th century. Another publisher to be wary of as they reuse Wikipedia articles is Alphascript Publishing. Fences &amp;  Windows  16:51, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Ditto Yehezkel Abramsky. Fences  &amp;  Windows  16:53, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Category:Rabbi's whose tombs have become pilgrimage sites
Chesdovi, please note that the plural of rabbi is rabbis (no apostrophe). Would you please correct the name of the category? Thanks. --Redaktor (talk) 14:11, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Boaz and Jachin

 * Boaz and Jachin are interesting, because while they get a long and detailed treatment in Kings, they are not the focus of very much attention in later Jewish sources. Although a number of synagogues have paired columns explicitly labeled Boaz and Jachin - I mean Boaz and Jachin are carved in stone in Hebrew on stone columns.  They get more attention from Christian, masonic and occult sources.   I know.  Masonic and occult.  But the Masons were a very big deal in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.  Occult sources exist and, therefore, Wikipedia needs to treat objectively objects like Boaz and Jachin that these occult texts treat as magical.  And, most significantly to my mind, they figure largely in Christian art and architecture.  The old article that you linked is paltry indeed.   If you restore it, I'll put up a far better one.AMuseo (talk) 12:38, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Temple discussion at ANI
Hi Chesdovi: A discussion and related vote you participated in is being reviewed at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. You may want to add your views to the ongoing discussion. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 05:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)