User talk:Chesdovi/Archive 4

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Orthodox rabbis who had alternative occupations
Category:Orthodox rabbis who had alternative occupations, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. JFW &#124; T@lk  20:39, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Joseph's tomb
Hi, do you read German? I have a very detailed history of Joseph's tomb and well in German. I can send it if you ask by email. Zerotalk 04:23, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, you already sent it to me, but I don't know German. Chesdovi (talk) 23:47, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

ARBPIA 72 hr topic ban
Debresser and Chesdovi are both topic banned from Israeli / Palestinian topic areas for 72 hrs due to disruptive editing and edit warring, with a healthy dose of personal attacks and incivility thrown in. This sanction is enacted under the Arbcom case sanctions and will be so logged.

Please DO NOT CONTINUE this behavior after the 72 hr ban is over. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 03:19, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Un-impostoring
Looks like the user Off2riorob took care of it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:49, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allegations of Jewish control of the media
Your !vote at Articles for deletion/Allegations of Jewish control of the media, while very amusing, might confuse the closing admin regarding your true feelings about this article. Would you consider clarifying? Jayjg (talk) 21:55, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Metulla 1896. A Tel Hai 1917 Yesud Hama'ala 1883^%, Ayelet Hashahar 1918 • alVlishmar Hayarden EinZeitim

Einstein
You may be right, but please be careful when changing the assessments of articles. The importance is generally assessed by members of the Wiki Project in question. When in doubt edit separately for each project. Thanks. mge o talk 10:36, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Please remove remark
Please remove this edit. It is belligerent, and therefore counterproductive to the discussion. In addition, it is factually incorrect, because two other editors have already disagreed with you, one of them in continuation of his previous posts. Debresser (talk) 17:56, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Per your off-Wikipedia request, I have made the following edit. Please also notice the editsummary. Debresser (talk) 14:08, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Muammar Gaddafi speech, 22 Feb 2011.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Muammar Gaddafi speech, 22 Feb 2011.png, 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 17:33, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Elyah Lopian.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Elyah Lopian.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 18:09, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Kagan New York Times obituary.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Kagan New York Times obituary.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 23:12, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Wailing Wall, Palestine Post 1934.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Wailing Wall, Palestine Post 1934.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 23:25, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Wailing Wall Road, 1967.jpeg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Wailing Wall Road, 1967.jpeg, 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 23:31, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Yisroel Yaakov Fisher.jpeg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Yisroel Yaakov Fisher.jpeg, 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 00:09, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Tiferet yisrael 1930.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tiferet yisrael 1930.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 00:14, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Timeline of the name Palestine
Please provide justification for all the tags added to this article today, or they will be removed. To ensure you have a proper understanding of the topic, please first review the external references section of the article, in particular: Oncenawhile (talk) 17:44, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Jacobson
 * Feldman
 * Gerber
 * Also, Edward Said's A Question of Palestine
 * I know I should have provided explanation at talk, but have not yet had a chance. Sorry. Basically, I am concerned that you have gathered from early sources, however these being only translations. i.e. I doubt very much whether in Jewish Midrash the word Palestine appears. It is only referred to as such by the translator, but does not appear in the original text. It seems in this case, it appears only in the notes. The whole page needs to be based on tertiary sources. Chesdovi (talk) 17:49, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Category:Judean rabbis
Hi Chesdovi. You recently created Category:Judean rabbis a few days ago in spite of warnings not to create such categories that have brought you into the midst of editorial conflicts with other users and in spite of a number of related CfDs and calls for discussions about this subject at Category_talk:16th-century_Palestinian_rabbis and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism. You are violating WP:CONSENSUS and the terms of the warnings that were issued to you recently, see User talk:Chesdovi. Please cool it, or further sanctions against you will be requested. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 19:21, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I have reverted your addition of this category to several articles, as well as blanked the category page. You have to stop doing this kind of thing until those discussions are decided. And since they will not be decided in your favor, you will just have to stop this - period. Debresser (talk) 19:35, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Palestine add.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Palestine add.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 16:05, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

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

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arfican (talk • contribs) 11:10, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:I D 69.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:I D 69.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:05, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:AS P1.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:AS P1.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:06, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Please see and shudder
User_talk:Arfican for the refutation of your slanderous remark. Debresser (talk) 14:01, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

WP:CANVAS and WP:NFCC violation
This edit violates WP:CANVAS and WP:NFCC. Please revert it ASAP. --Damiens .rf 16:36, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * While putting the actual image on the noticeboard was inaappropriate, it is not canvassing to notify a noticeboard per CANVAS. Dreadstar  ☥  16:52, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * But the caption may have been uncalled for. Chesdovi (talk) 17:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, Chesdovi. Also, please take some time to get yourself familiar with our policies and practices in regard to the use of non-free images. Our bar for using these image is a little bit higher than what you may seem to believe, judging by your comments on the deletion discussions. Getting to know our habits may prevent you from further frustrations. But in anycase, thanks for the always polite interactions. --Damiens .rf 17:27, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * CANVAS says "such notices should be polite, neutrally worded....". I wouldn't call this exactly neutrally worded: "Do you want this to be deleted?. Then take no action!". -
 * Dread, we all know at this point you don't like me. But now you're just pushing the limits. -Damiens .rf 17:23, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * A concern that you did not make clear with your initial comments. Be more cautious with your notifications in the future.  Dreadstar  ☥  17:39, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess it was clear enough to Chedovi, that what who it was addressed to to begin with. Try to be less nosy next time, but if you can't, at least be less arrogant when your mistakes are pointed out. --Damiens .rf 17:45, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Damiens, I made no mistakes here, just clarifying that putting a notice on a noticeboard is not canvassing per WP:CANVAS. I'll be as nosy as I need to be.  Apologies to Chesdovi if I did butt in here... :) Dreadstar  ☥  17:59, 17 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Chesdovi, definitely use WP:NFCC, as well as acceptable use and Unacceptable use policy and guidelines in any image discussion or decision. Dreadstar  ☥  17:39, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for those tips and links. Chesdovi (talk) 17:41, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Glad to help! Dreadstar  ☥  17:59, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of 2010 Kenya–Somalia border clash for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2010 Kenya–Somalia border clash is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/2010 Kenya–Somalia border clash until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Armbrust Talk to me  Contribs  15:57, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

IOJUJO
It's from this discussion, specifically this comment I made on May 31. Cheers. ← George talk 20:14, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Palestinian people
Hi Chesdovi. Your recent contribution to Palestinian people appears to be copied and pasted verbatim from the source. That violates Wikipedia's copyright policy. Please rewrite the sentence in your own words to eliminate the copyright violation. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 21:26, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Help on Talk:Eleazar ben Judah of Bartota
I saw you added cat. Can you help me out on Talk:Eleazar ben Judah of Bartota ?

ThanX! --89.139.48.211 (talk) 00:32, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Autopatrol
Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:
 * This permission does not give you any special status or authority
 * Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
 * You may wish to display the Autopatrolled top icon and/or the User wikipedia/autopatrolled userbox on your user page
 * If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
 * If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Dabomb87 (talk) 00:58, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Anabta
Would you mind reproducing the text used in the source you cited for this [edit]? The Google books entry does not display nearly enough information to confirm what you have added, so I think it would be helpful if you could reproduce it since I do not have the book. Thanks. -asad (talk) 14:16, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * "This Narbata which so far has not been identified, is, most probably, Khirbet en-Nerabeh by ‘Anebta, in the north-west of Samaria. The Aramaic form of its name must be traced back to Neraba. Perhaps also the name 'Anebta originated from 'Ain Narbata. It is true, the distance given by Josephus does not fit in. His 60 stadia = 4040 yards would have to be altered into 146 stadia. The distance given by him reaches only as far as the edge of the highland, and may in reality only refer to the western boundary of the territory of Narbata. According to Georgios Kedrenos,5 the " plain under Parnas " and Narbathon (or Narbathos) were a part of the domain of Herod Antipas. By the former the Huleb plain below Paneas (=Bamas) is meant, and the latter is the Narbatean toparchy, the Herodian possession of….."

Thanks, that makes more sense. Also, thanks for the other information you added about the town, it is very interesting. I would just like to point out one thing though, I do not believe the source is correct in this edit. To my knowledge, and many people in this town who are still alive and lived were alive in that 1931, there were never any Christians, Jewish or Druze. I have asked many people who's ancestor's who have come from Anabta for centuries and there were never people other than Muslims. I am pretty sure the source is wrong on this. What do you think? -asad (talk) 21:57, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I have the census reports and can explain this, I think. Very small locations were lumped together with larger locations rather than being listed separately.  In the case of Anabta, the counts also include Iktaba and "Nur ash Shams", which are both about 6km to the west (closer to Tulkarm than to Anabta).  In the 1922 census, Anabta and Iktaba are listed separately and show only Muslims (1606 and 121, respectively).  Most interestingly, "Nur ash Shams" (located where the Nur Shams refugee camp is now), appears on a 1935 map as "Nur ash Shams (Jail Labour Co. No. 1)".  So it was some sort of prison, maybe a prison farm or similar.  Those Christians, Jews and Druze in 1931 might have been prisoners or prison staff. The Christians would include British. Zerotalk 00:21, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Category:Talmud rabbis of the Land of Israel
You contributed to the recent discussion at WP:Cfd. The closing editor recommended that a discussion be started on a new name and we should seek consensus there before proceeding to Cfd again. I've opened such a discussion on Category:Talmud rabbis of the Land of Israel and invite you to participate. Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:04, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Palestinian categories
I hope you dont mind if I butt in on this issue, but it seems as though a simple solution is being ignored. You want to use the term "Palestinian" to refer to those residents of a place called Palestine. I dont see a problem with this, but others apparently do, regardless of the quality of their objections. Why not just say "in Palestine" or "from Palestine" in the title of the category? So, instead of Category:16th-century Palestinian rabbis you would have Category:16th-century rabbis in Palestine or Category:16th-century rabbis from Palestine?  nableezy  - 15:29, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * This has only just been suggested one of the opposers, namley Biosketch. If they were so worried about their "concerns", why did IZAK or Debresser not suggest such a name themselves much earlier on? The problem they all have is with the word "Palestine," not its claimed confusion over ethnicity. Debresser also objected to Category:Mediveal Jews in Palestine. IZAK changes each category connected to Jews named Palestine to "Land of Israel". There is a larger issue at hand here. Chesdovi (talk) 16:47, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Carrigal was a palestinian.tif
Thanks for uploading File:Carrigal was a palestinian.tif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status and its source. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file.

Please add this information by editing the image description page. If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is [ a list of your uploads]. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:40, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Deletion review
If you'll notice at the bottom of this diff, new nominations should be placed below the line that says "place new nominations BELOW THIS LINE" (emphasis theirs). I can't fix this for you, as it requires your signature, so you'll have to fix this yourself. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 11:08, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I wondered why it wasn't appearing. My suspicion of a conspiracy are indeed unfounded. Chesdovi (talk) 11:12, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Category:Buildings and structures completed in the 20th century
Why, well it is a specific category that explains why a building or structure has significance in a given year or century. Architecture is very unspecific as to why there is significance. Is it because the building was designed in said year, is it because the building started construction in said year, is it because the building was finished in said year? The completed categories also roll up into the engineering tree since that is involved with construction and not all architecture is engineering related. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:59, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Ottoman Palestine
I dislike your walking the edges, but have no real problem with adding a link to Palestine to the name of cities. Please see Palestine that the name Palestine was not the official of the region since the beginning of Ottoman rule in the 16th century. Debresser (talk) 12:12, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I grossly dislike and am disgusted by your parochial, manipulative approach. Chesdovi (talk) 12:21, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I think you should use Ottoman Palestine, not Palestine. If I notice other editors making that change, I think your edits will have to be modified. If not, I'll not push on this one, since there is something to say for it. If only you weren't such a pusher. Debresser (talk) 12:29, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:PUSH has your name written all over it. Ottoman Palestine redirects to Palestine, so you better be having words with User:Brewcrewer if you want to do any of your "modifying". Chesdovi (talk) 12:44, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 1. I changed that redirect now, see the editsummary for the rationale. 2. Even while it was still a redirect to "Palestine", it would still be better to use "Ottoman Palestine", since it is always good to be precise. Debresser (talk) 13:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Warning
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

Do not change my post to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Judaism. You can add that image, even though it is of no use there, below my post only. Debresser (talk) 12:55, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Why don't you move it if it bothers you? What very strange behaviour. Chesdovi (talk) 13:22, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Not only does it bother me, it is a violation of Wikipedia guidelines. And so is this editsummary. Ever see WP:CIVIL? Debresser (talk) 13:33, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No. It is a violation of the rules to delete other peoples comments. You are really asking for it. Chesdovi (talk) 13:40, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Read again, and on User warning templates, that it says "editing" and "refactoring", not only "deleting". Debresser (talk) 13:47, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't know which bit of your comment I edited, but if you felt bothered that the image was too close to you, why did you not move it down, instead of deleting, a serious violation in itself. I will only concede that I forgot to sign it. I have had enough of you games here. Something will happen. Chesdovi (talk) 13:52, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Like the Lord striking me with lightening? There are no games. I am just trying to stop you pushing certain edits and behaving any way you like. And I do so in respect for your person and the good things you do on Wikipedia. I'd like to be able to say I feel the same attitude from your side. Debresser (talk) 14:02, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You are behaving any way you like by taking the law into your own hands by reverting brand new edits that you WP:DONTLIKE. The only way this will be sorted out is if you stop enforcing you POV before the issue at and has been discussed and judged upon by the community. Your censorship tactics are vile. Chesdovi (talk) 14:15, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I am sorry you see things that way. Still, I remember at times even you acknowledged that I am not "wagging a war" against you, and did not revert all the things you did. Even today, I have not reverted your addition of a link to "Palestine" even though I think "Ottoman Palestine" would be more appropriate, and I have agreed with you in a rename discussion to "Category:16th-century rabbis in Palestine". Debresser (talk)

fyi
Hi. I know you've already expressed a view, and it of course may not change your view, but I just wanted to let you know that since then I added a number of sources to Agudas Achim Congregation (Alexandria, Virginia), the subject of Articles for deletion/Agudas Achim Congregation (Alexandria, Virginia). Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 04:15, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi -- I've just noticed that you've created articles that have a lesser level of indicia of notability (in the form of refs) that this one now has reflected in the article, so perhaps this now meets your personal criteria of notability. I don't know if you missed this note, so am dropping  by again.  Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 19:40, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Please feel free to nominate them as I did myself recently. Chesdovi (talk) 20:24, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:I Herzog.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:I Herzog.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:06, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:History of out people 5th edit. 1968.tif
Thanks for uploading File:History of out people 5th edit. 1968.tif. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:05, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Blackman mishnayoth 1951.tif
Thanks for uploading File:Blackman mishnayoth 1951.tif. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:06, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:J Hertz daily prayer book, 14th edition, 1971.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:J Hertz daily prayer book, 14th edition, 1971.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:07, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Immanuel Jakobovits, Palestine.png
Thanks for uploading File:Immanuel Jakobovits, Palestine.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:06, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Shach
Sorry about that. JoshuaZ (talk) 01:16, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Jewish knowlegde.tif
Thanks for uploading File:Jewish knowlegde.tif. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:05, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Modern Jewish thoughts 1960.tif
Thanks for uploading File:Modern Jewish thoughts 1960.tif. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:06, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:1977 Soncino Tamud.tif
Thanks for uploading File:1977 Soncino Tamud.tif. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:08, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:J H Hetz Pentateuch 1929.tif
Thanks for uploading File:J H Hetz Pentateuch 1929.tif. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:09, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Silberman rashi.tif
Thanks for uploading File:Silberman rashi.tif. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:10, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:A Steinsaltz 1977.tif
Thanks for uploading File:A Steinsaltz 1977.tif. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:11, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

source quality
I wish you would be more fussy about your sources. It should be obvious that Kaplan's book is a polemic and that he has no expertise in demographics. There isn't any scholarly support for the claim he makes. Zerotalk 14:16, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Look, I believed him okay, he is a rabbi you know. Okay, this is a good book: . Chesdovi (talk) 15:10, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, the book by Hezser seems quite good. Zerotalk 03:23, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ...but instead you look for tertiary sources whose version you prefer. Encyclopedia Americana???  If you devoted your time to finding the most eminent sources regardless of what they say, you would be a great editor.  I'm bothering to make this criticism out of respect.. Zerotalk 09:29, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

A/E
-asad (talk) 16:43, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Jewish Community of Hebron logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Jewish Community of Hebron logo.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:07, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry
My reversion here was an error - I clicked on the wrong "undo" in my watch list. I reinstated your original text a few minutes later when I saw what happened. Apologies for the error. Tvoz / talk 21:12, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Topic ban
For the reasons stated in this AE thread, and under the authority of WP:ARBPIA, you are hereby banned from all articles, discussions, and other content related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed across all namespaces, for one year. This ban may be appealed following the procedures set out in WP:ARBPIA; however, I will not consider any appeal until at least three months have elapsed. T. Canens (talk) 09:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Chesdovi, I am, sincerely, sorry that you got hit with a ban of such a length. I think I have told you this before in the past, but I think you are, for the most part, a good editor. However, when you decide to do something you go full steam ahead, without regard for the views of others. I cant lie, I do the same myself though I have tried to go a bit slower in the past year or so. The issue with the categories is a good example (and like Debresser I dont think that it falls in the ARBPIA topic area; while the motivations of some are surely based on Zionist views and a dislike of the word Palestinian, I dont think anybody can make a reasonable argument that whether or not a 16th century Rabbi was Palestinian is in the Arab-Israeli topic area). I wrote at your AE that if you were willing to slow down a bit I would support no ban, and I still would. But look at what happened at Hebron. You completely removed the seal of the city and replaced it with the seal of the settlers council. When that was reverted you added an infobox for the city based on the settlers council. You did not wait to see if your position had any support before restoring the seal, you just decided that you were right and that was the way the article would be. As I am sure you know, I have gotten in a bit of trouble for a similar, and I hope you forgive me for being frank, bullheadedness. I still think you are, for the most part, a decent editor. But you need to slow down when you are in a dispute. Take care, <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 14:37, 29 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, I wasn't aware there was anything going on at AE until it was over. Despite the fact that your editing annoys me quite often, I always thought of you as an honest editor and we need honest editors from a variety of viewpoints.  If you want to apply for a remission after a time, I'll support you.  I'll be out of touch for a few days, though (a very long journey). Zerotalk 10:50, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Your topic ban and our disagreement
For what it's worth, in my personal opinion the subject of our disagreement - see Category talk:16th-century Palestinian rabbis - is not related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. I for one, do not see it so. But the banning admin might take a different stance on that issue. I suggest you take it up with him. Feel free to quote my opinion to him. Georgewilliamherbert, who topic banned you (and me) from "Israeli / Palestinian topic areas" for 72 hours in this edit obviously thinks differently about this. Debresser (talk) 14:05, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You still have not said what the "chief rabbi evidence" proves. Chesdovi (talk) 15:33, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Now I see the source of the misunderstanding. I was referring to the dictionary entry you brought there. I replied that it proves rather the contrary. I didn't mean the chief-rabbi section at all. Debresser (talk) 15:35, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The scope of the ban does include Palestinian rabbis, Palestinian minhag, Palestinian synagogues, etc., since it's the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that is the reason we're locked in our debate. If the word "Palestinian" did not come to be associated with Palestinian statehood, there wouldn't be any confusion involved in it and and I probably wouldn't object to it. But despite that being said, I wouldn't have a problem were the banning Admin to make an exception in this case to allow  to continue contributing to those articles and their related Discussion pages. It wouldn't be fair for User:Debresser or myself to avail ourselves of User:Chesdovi's one-year absence to make changes that would otherwise be seriously challenged. This is also why I think the banning Admin's decision is scandalous. It hurts the Project much more than it helps it. Even though I disagree with Chesdovi's conclusion (though not necessarily his methodology), his contribution to the Project has been outstanding. Debresser, it sounds as though you agree with me. So perhaps we should suspend our discussion for three months, whereupon Chesdovi will be able to submit an appeal of his ban, and when that time comes we'll support lifting it for the reasons I just gave and pick up where we left off.—Biosketch (talk) 06:56, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I disagree. I think the discussion was closed correctly before when the category was deleted. And I don't see much agreement with Chesdovi's point of view anyway. So I think we should not wait for him, but close the issue as it was. In addition, a banned editor should not try to return to previous disagreements right after the end of his ban. Debresser (talk) 08:21, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * We shouldn't stoop to the level of other editors who exploit AE to suppress debate and create facts on the ground in controversial articles. The situation now isn't ideal, but it's what we've got. put a lot of his time and resources into the discussion at 16th-century rabbis, and we owe him the courtesy of still being considerate of his position, even if it means making a concession we're not happy with for the moment.—Biosketch (talk) 11:21, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I see no reason to be stuck with a discussion which is decided as it is for possibly up to a year because of this. If anything, Chesdovi's ban lends argument to my opinion, that he is a pushy and tendentious editor, and that all his arguing in this matter is just another example of both these traits. And again, I see a clear consensus disagreeing with Chesdovi. In short, I don't view his ban as a great loss to the community (in effect, the community seems to deem it the best way of resolving a problem), and think we should go on doing the right thing. Sorry to hack Chesdovi's talkpage in such a way, and to write such negative things about him. It's a bit of a chutzpe, but then, that is probably justice. In any case, I do appreciate his positive contributions, but agree with the community decision that at this moment we are better off without him. Debresser (talk) 17:25, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Nicosia municipal logo - Turkey.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Nicosia municipal logo - Turkey.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:06, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Nicosia municipal logo - Cyprus.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Nicosia municipal logo - Cyprus.gif. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:07, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:16th-century Palestinian rabbis
Category:16th-century Palestinian rabbis, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.  Sandstein  17:43, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Chanoch Ehrentreu
Thanks for taking this up.--Peter cohen (talk) 11:30, 6 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Is there a reason that you deleted the few sentences that I wrote, which did not pass judgement on anyone, merely linked to sources from both sides, and helped to provide a greater understanding of this controversy? Do you actually know anything about it? Why would you get rid of a link to google books? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.67.203.141 (talk) 08:45, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It was not me. Chesdovi (talk) 09:43, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

My apologies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.193.116.142 (talk) 11:58, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Great Synagogue of London
Who destroyed it? Chesdovi (talk) 09:39, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You tell me!-it was evidently destroyed by a bomb or a fire that resulted from the Blitz (as is appropriately categorized). But it was not a 'synagogue destroyed by the Nazis' in that they deliberately sent in, or organized, people to smash it up, as they did for the other synagogues in Category:Synagogues destroyed by Nazi Germany.--Smerus (talk) 12:57, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The German Airforce does not equal the Nazis. Bombings of anything in Brittain by the German airforce are not actions of the Nazis.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:05, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Really? The "German Airforce" or Wehrmacht is not synonymous with "Nazi Germany"? How odd. Am I wrong is saying that the Blitz was carried out by Nazi Germany? Chesdovi (talk) 09:44, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Menachem Mendl Hager.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Menachem Mendl Hager.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free 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 the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 18:25, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Menachem Mendl Hager.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Menachem Mendl Hager.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 03:53, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Yitschok Yaakov Dovid Hager.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Yitschok Yaakov Dovid Hager.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 03:54, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Etiquette
Hello, Chesdovi. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Debresser (talk) 18:40, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Re: Category
Hi Chesdovi! IIRC I was referring to the same discussion, which I started in 2007. The comment about 2007 was just added because it's usually an odd thing to restart a 2-year-old discussion (although not uncommon). Cheers, Ynhockey (Talk) 13:12, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

FYI-2
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Debresser (talk) 13:58, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Categories
"Historical regions" and "Subdivisions of former countries" are very different things. Term ""historical region" refer to modern region which has certain historical significance, while "subdivisions of former countries" are former official administrative units that do not existing in modern times. Some historical regions might correspond with former subdivisions, but some other might not. The only problem that I see with "Historical regions by country" category would be fact that some articles from that categorization tree would rather belong to "subdivisions of former countries", so you are free to move any such article to more appropriate category. PANONIAN  16:40, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Cordial invitation
As a sign of goodwill, I'd like to invite you to comment on a proposal about splitting the article on the Arizal, which seems to be more about Lurianic Kabbalah at the moment. Please comment here. Debresser (talk) 03:07, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Nicosia municipal logo - Turkey.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Nicosia municipal logo - Turkey.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 not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive 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 your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:46, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Countries and regions
There are many unclear cases, and "country" isn't a particularly clear term. Even "sovereign state" is not completely clearcut. It seems pretty clear that Bavaria was a sovereign Kingdom from 1814-1871; was it a "country" from 1871-1918 (when it was part of the German Empire) or before 1792, when it was part of the Holy Roman Empire? As for Galicia, there was a sovereign medieval kingdom, but it has not been a sovereign state in modern times. Are empires countries? It seems weird to call the British Empire a country because it recognized various "dominions" (Canada, India, etc.) within it; on the other hand, it isn't a region either. And of course the Ottoman Empire included some dependencies that weren't fully integrated.... --Macrakis (talk) 05:50, 15 July 2011 (UTC)


 * The Austro-Hungarian Empire was definitely a country in the modern sense of the word. Debresser (talk) 10:19, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Bummer
Please consider this your last warning as to mentioning my name when my editing style. You are using it in such a manor by inferring that I have a bad editing style that goes against policy. Under WP:NPA:
 * Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence - Serious accusations require serious evidence. Evidence often takes the form of diffs and links presented on wiki. Sometimes evidence is kept private and made available to trusted users.

If there is a matter of my editing that you view is violating WP policy, I suggest you e-mail an administrator about the issue. But making claims about my editing without backing them up (even though you can't even back them up considering your ban) will lead to me seeking enforcement. -asad (talk) 17:32, 15 July 2011 (UTC)