User talk:GHcool/Archive 6

Re:Arab nationalism
Good job yourself! Thanks for spearheading edits to the article. Obviously it still needs more expansion and editing. I look forward to working with you on improving it further if you're interested. Cheers! --Al Ameer son (talk) 23:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Slave (book)


The article The Slave (book) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No indication of how this might meet notability guidelines. Lacks citations to significant coverage in reliable sources.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RadioFan (talk) 20:05, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Israeli wars and armed conflicts
Please share your knowledge regarding which were the most prominent IDF military operations in the discussion page of that article. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 17:53, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I more or less agree with the list you gave. --GHcool (talk) 23:52, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Without inspections?
Isn't this impossible since the cargo has already been inspected? Zuchinni one (talk) 00:37, 6 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I think the point is that Hamas wants the flotilla folks to come onto Gaza's shores and deliver the aid. Israel cannot allow this because who knows what else the flotilla guys have hidden up their sleeves.  Israel insists on being the middle man for obvious reasons.  Is there a way we can make this clearer? --GHcool (talk) 06:05, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

"I think the point is that Hamas wants the flotilla folks to come onto Gaza's shores and deliver the aid." You think so??? Do you edit articles when you "think so"? Are you an advocate or spokesman of Israeli government and creating excuses for an attack to a passanger ship on international waters? Is this a discussion forum or an encyclopedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tufankaya (talk • contribs)


 * I edit articles when I think they can be improved. I am not a spokesman of the Israeli government.  --GHcool (talk) 22:49, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

So you improve articles with your thoughts since you explain and defend your edit with starting "I think..." My idea you also give the source below as "my brain"Tufankaya (talk) 08:47, 12 June 2010 (UTC)


 * No need. I use my thoughts to decide whether an edit is appropriate and if I decide that it is, I use a reliable source to back it up.  I suggest you try it some time.  :) --GHcool (talk) 03:06, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Whatever, I feel that you are not open to critisize yourself since you take yourself as a "side" at certain articles. You can continue to make up these articles and try to show a certain state as less disrespectful to international laws. It is your personal problem to deal with. Have a nice day and bye.Tufankaya (talk) 22:07, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

your essays
shalom, I read them and I congratulate you for being so forthcoming (and calling the flak!). I will add two facts: (a) regarding the Palestinian identity as a people, just that the 1947 partition decision was stated for a Jewish and an Arab state (not a Palestinian state, then nobody did seem to notice there was such a thing as a Palestinian people), and (b) the Palestinian genocide by the Israelis is the only known genocide of a population steadily increasing (while being genocided) and even so out of proportion with any other one world wide (thanks to the US -the reviled and demonized ones- subsidized support of the UNWRA and the well hailed Palestinian scheme of the demographic bomb, may be an Israeli plot to multiply their victims (more fun)? pff these clever Jews! You give the wise advice: ''One way that fair-minded Wikipedia editors could help is by not getting emotionally involved in an argument with an anti-Semitic, anti-verifiability, or intellectually dishonest Wikipedia editor and engaged in revert wars. They should simply let the evidence speak for itself and argue in favor of the evidence.'' Sure but this is highly ineffecient when confronted by an organized systematic front, what do you think of an editor which busy himself with tracking every mention of Israel in order to delete as many as (even im)possible and to include where ever he wants the diverse declentions of the O word -(80%) of his edits the remaining 20% being litigation against his adversaries...- as if that was his existence's sole purpose, it's called gaming the system and you advocate us fighting terrorism with an hand tied behind the back. Please note also that that editor doesn't participate in the discussion for the RfC leaving his lieutenants go into the battle and eventually take the fall. Any other advice? take care, Hope&amp;Act3! (talk) 21:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments. I'm not sure what you're referring to in the latter half of your message, but if you read my essays, you no doubt read my essay attesting to the fact that Israel has never been guilty of genocide.  --GHcool (talk) 16:09, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Zionist terrorism category in Israeli–Palestinian conflict article
My apology for changing the categories. I was wrong. Thanks for informing about the guideline, of which I was unaware. Cheers. --Frederico1234 (talk) 11:30, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You're very welcome. Thank you for your cooperation.  :) --GHcool (talk) 16:42, 25 June 2010 (UTC)