User talk:Eidah

Handshake
Hmm, a Dutch Anti-Zionist with a thing for Dushinsky, the Eidah, and Givat Shaul... At the very least, I have to give you credit for sticking to your guns. This time, lets work together. You have a lot to say. Maybe I can help refine the message, and make it acceptable for Wikipedia. Despite your protestations, I am not a Zionist. And my edits to some of your friend Daniel's posts were kinder and gentler than others would have allowed had they gotten there first. --Meshulam 04:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Amen to that, brothers. Now keep in mind all those halochos of bein odom lechaveiro. -- Y not? 16:04, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

3RR
I believe you just violated WP:3RR on Neturei Karta. Please self-revert. Thank you. -- Avi 15:30, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Courtesy notice - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR#User:Eidah_reported_by_User:Avraham_.28Result:.29 -- Avi 15:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked from editing for in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below.

Extremist
The word extremist is a problem because its POV. It is possible to say that one side views the other side as extremist. But it is not ok to quote the leading figure in one side of the conflict as proof that the other side is extremist. Yes, your edits comply with WP:OR. But they do not comply with WP:POV. I suggest that it be changed to something suggesting that one side considers the other side "extremist." Then show how. Then, maybe, provide (sourced) examples.--Meshulam 11:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The other thing to remember is that if you're perceived as being a pain, you'll never win an edit war. And a 24 hr block means that everyone gets free reign on the articles in question until you're done. And then if you go back to edit warring, they'll just block you again. If you can reach a consensus (I'll help you on this one), then things will be more permanant.--Meshulam 01:27, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * With respect to your statement on my page: better, perhaps, to say that people consider them extremist. Extremist is a POV term. If you say that they are considered extremist (and name who thinks they're extremist... like Satmar Rebbeim, for example), then you aren't giving your POV, but rather reporting on facts. --Meshulam 23:38, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Torah v'Yiroh
I agree that it is beautiful. In the States' Torah v'Yiroh is normally a Satmar name. Is that Beis Midrash affiliated with Satmar? I thought NK was independent.--Meshulam 21:47, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No, it's Rav Katzenellenbogen's BM. See the NK article! There is a Satmar yeshiva in the same building, but they are not really affiliated, though of course there are friendly ties. Just that on Yom Ha'atzamos, the mourning is a bit more intense at NK then at Satmar. Aside from that they're basically the same. But it is a separate group - for example, at NK, the nusach is Ashkenaz (nusach haGro). It's right next to the shtieblach in M.S., on the 2nd floor. If you're ever here, it's definitely worth a visit. BEAUTIFUL. Compare with - before the renovation! --Eidah 21:51, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Category:Orthodox Jewish Anti-Zionism
Hi Eidah: See Categories for discussion/Log/2007 August 22. Thank you. IZAK 13:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Various edits of yours
For example All I can say is:
 * 1) It is Chodesh Elul
 * 2) Michah, Vav, Ches
 * 3) Kol Hamevayish Pnei Chavero B'rabim…
 * 4) Any positive effect you can think of by using kana'us is more than outweighed by even the slightest chillul HaShem you may cause.
 * 5) Please think long and hard about what you believe your goal here is, realizing that ad bi'as goel tzedek we are in galus.

-- Avi 15:42, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Reminder of the Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point rule
Eidah, in regards to this post, please review Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€  23:54, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Stop x nuvola with clock.svg|40px|left]] in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for . Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions.  If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text  below.  --PinchasC |  £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€  13:00, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Please don't cal me names
It is against etiquette, i am not a liar, and not a Zionist, i can sometimes lie and sometimes be a Zionist by standing up for my rights against the gentiles when they do wrong against me in business. Listen i feel u have a good agenda of inflating the orthodox Jewish cause against Zionism today. orthodox judaism is no question opposed to Zionism, but lets be frank they are not considered active anti Zionists, only if you make this category so broad that all of orthodox Jewry should be part of it. thanks and looking forward for some discussion about this in a civil way.--יודל 16:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Orthodox Anti-Zionism
I would give an oppose vote, but I think the discussion is already closed. By the way, don't you know that the Zionists control the media r"l. A kisiva v'chasima toyve Lobbuss 21:23, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Language
Careful about the language you use, especially on talk pages. I know that you're concerned with the veracity of some of the articles with respect to Zionism. That is understandable. The problem is that your message is easily dismissed if you use inflammatory language to explain your edits. Dushinsky Chassidus may well be anti-Zionist (remember to bring citations), but that does not necessitate you telling everyone that you're going to throw up if you hear this or that name. (If you indeed do throw up, all power to you :-P, but it isn't necessary for me to know that. More importantly, it isn't necessary to give ammo to your detractors... your position is not popular on this forum lechatchila, so you'll be more successful if you don't give people excuses to revert you)--Meshulam 23:53, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Are you blocked User:Daniel575?
Question: Are you a sock puppet of banned User:Daniel575? See also Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Daniel575. Please reply ASAP and explain why not and how you are different. Thank you, IZAK 11:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Nu? IZAK 12:13, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Numbers of NK
Do you have any idea, estimate, guesstimate how many members of NK there are and how many in the radical Hirsch branch? My guess is about 100 families. They make a LOT of noise that causes people to think they are much larger. Please your opinion. BTW are you Israeli born? I am from London, now in Beer-Sheva. Benqish 13:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, MY question was not clear!!! How many in all of NK and how many in the radical Hirsch branch? Do any statistics exist to your knowledge?

Sockpuppetry case
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Suspected sock puppets/Daniel575 (7th) for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. IZAK 16:37, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Dear Eida i ask u to not address those ridicules acusations, pease understand the frusterations of user Izak and forgive him, he wants to delete the category of orthodox Jewish anti Zionism, and the community has voted to leave it. Lets only stay on topic, answer him only and strictly why u believe that the anti Zionist Jews are important enough to merit a whole category in itself, and stop calling other users names and accusations like this we will only respect u and u will win in your cause of spreading this fact that there are indeed tens of thousands of orthodox jews who are opposed to Zionism. Thanks--יודל 23:22, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Gemarah Logic
There is no need to make a separate article when the entire article is already included in an already present article. Yossiea (talk) 16:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been indefinitely blocked, because evidence at Suspected sock puppets/Daniel575 (7th) has shown that this account is a sockpuppet or meatpuppet of User:Daniel575 used to circumvent Wikipedia policies. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below. --Akhilleus (talk) 23:00, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Hareidim and Zionism
i am holding back to edit out the particulars which i answer u on the talk page since u r blocked and have no ability to answer there, i will wait for u to come back with a new beginning and stop saying Musar to others like the Zionists and we will work to gather to clean up all those Zionists POV agendas from those users who blocked u. looking forward on our collaboration.--יודל 13:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)