User talk:Irrer

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, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! -- S iva1979 Talk to me 09:40, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

WP:3RR
Hi,

You've reverted Tunisia three times, your limit under the three-revert rule. If you do so again within the 24 hours from after the first revert you will be blocked from editing.

Bouha 11:01, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Bouha,

I noted your opposition to my reverts and your preference for the latter version. I believe that the older version is far richer historically and generally better & more comprehensive than the newer and poorer version. I do not wish in anyway to worsen the content, which is why I have reverted it thrice. This, I am sure, is also your wish. I hope you did not interpret my reverts as arrogance on my part, far from it. As noted in my edits, I will not make any further changes for now. Please let me know why you believe the newer version is a better version. Thank you. Irrer 11:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. — Gareth Hughes 11:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello Gareth Hughes,

Thank you for your message. I have not made any "unconstructive" edits to wikipedia, as evidenced by my edits to the Syria page, where I merely reverted to a version that includes Palestine alongside Israel. Removing any reference to Palestine, a country that is recognized by Arab states (as well as some non-Arab states) and one that is a member of the Arab League, is inaccurate and far from neutral. The establishment of Israel has not rendered the term obsolete. Denying the validity of the term is akin to those in the Arab or Muslim world who deny the term Israel. Your definition of neutrality=Vandalism is erroneous. Nonetheless, I am appreciative of your message& will not make any further edits to the Syria page for now. Thank you. Irrer 11:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm now considering you a possible sockpuppet of a particularly annoying user because of the pattern of your edits. You are not yet blocked, but may well be if vandalism continues. — Gareth Hughes 11:24, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello again Gareth Hughes,

According to wikipedia, Vandalism is defined as follows:

Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia.

The most common types of vandalism include the addition of obscenities to pages, page blanking, or the insertion of bad (or good) jokes or other nonsense. Fortunately, these types of vandalism are usually easy to spot.

Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism.

Unless I am mistaken, my inclusion of the term Palestine alongside Israel does not fall under this category, but was rather a good-faith effort on my part to improve the "encyclopedia" and use the term that most Palestinians use to identify their homeland. Nonetheless, I am very much appreciative of your courteous suggestion, and will refrain from making any further edits to the article for now. Again, thank you very much for warning me about the rules, and if I have misread wikipedia's definition of Vandalism, please do not hesitate to correct me. Irrer 11:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * This edit is identified as vandalism. Just look at how much you needlessly changed to make a point, most of it unrelated to your point. — Gareth Hughes 11:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello again Mr. Hughes, In fact, I made no changes at all, I reverted to an older version for the reason aforementioned. While I believe that Palestine should be mentioned alongside Israel, I will not, as mentioned above, make any further edits. I never attempted to "vanadalize" the article, and I don't believe that the version that I reverted to is in anyway a vandalized version of the current one. It is, in my opinion, a better version, one that is more representative of the Syrian Arab Republic. It is, however, incontrovertible that Palestine is not an obsolete term and should therefore be mentioned alongside Israle, especially in articles about ARAB countries that recognize Palestine and in Syria's case, only Palestine. Thanks again. Irrer 11:55, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Block
Likewise, you do not address your corruption and incompetence. Further proof that the masses are simply incompetent. Realistically, I shouldn't have expected you NOT to betray an ingrained personal prejudice and incompetence.

RE:BERBER PEOPLE
wich one was your version?, thanks-Nochi 19:30, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello :) I don't have a version, I just kept reverting to yours, as it is the most accurate. I tried to make some changes at first, but they kept reverting them and I felt like I was waging a losing battle, as most of the editors who edit that page are obviously unfamiliar with the region and/or the Berbers. Before you came, the article was a source of continual anguish for me, as I knew it to be inaccurate and propagandistic. In that sense, you are a godsend. Thank you so much. Irrer 20:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)