User talk:Moocha/Archives/2010/08

Andy goldstein sports bar
You might like to know about some vandalism to a page 'Lewis at wildshots' vandalised by ip address 90.199.86.65 to the page Andy Goldstein.
 * Thanks for the heads-up, if they cross edits again I will request a sockpuppet investigation. If their edits don't interleave anymore it can't be considered a case of sockpuppeteering, just a plain ole vandal :). Thanks again. Moocha (talk) 20:35, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * And it's pretty clear now - SPI case at Sockpuppet investigations/Lewis at wildshots. Moocha (talk) 20:43, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

source for jersulem not being capital and yes I realise it might be nice for it not to be a war
happy you give you the source for this

sorry did i need to put that on the page?

United Nations Security Council Resolution 478, adopted on August 20, 1980, declared Israel's 1980 Jerusalem Law a violation of international law, and states that the Council will not recognize this law, and calls on member states to accept the decision of the council. This resolution also calls upon member states to withdraw their diplomatic missions from the city. The law declared Jerusalem to be Israel's "eternal and indivisible" capital.

The resolution was passed with 14 votes to none against, with the United States abstaining.

and it's not really fair unless you decide to accept both sides

and i realise this is crap for you cause you must get it in the neck with this one

but you know what that isn't the capital under international law

and they may be only arabs......but in the end as much as jews love the land where there ansestors are buried so do the arabs where there fathers and granfathers lie buried

so moocha I now this must be a hateful job but international truth is more important than the wants of 1 set of people

you decide, I didnt think it was a biggie but obviously it is

sandra —Preceding unsigned comment added by Palpal156 (talk • contribs) 19:10, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi. I'm the first to admit I'm not particularly knowledgeable about the applicability of international law on the status of Jerusalem being or not the political capital of Israel, and, to be frank, I don't particularly care about the issue one way or the other. The only thing I'm concerned about here is avoiding edit warring on Wikipedia, and this particular issue always leads to that. Please avoid making changes of that nature directly on the article without first discussing it on the article's talk page where we can build consensus. Thank you. Moocha (talk) 20:46, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Of course, in this case "can" tends to mean "can't, because people seem to be too busy bickering over semantics", but one can dream, one can dream... Moocha (talk) 20:55, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Supplementary note: Before starting the argument up again, you might want to check the talk page archives, particularly Talk:Jerusalem/capital/2003–2009 and Talk:Jerusalem/capital/2010–present. Thanks! Moocha (talk) 20:50, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Desu ka ritual
What makes you think it is a hoax? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Submarine submarine (talk • contribs) 18:16, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The utter and complete lack of references and/or cited sources, coupled with a complete and utter lack of support for your assertion from the three major search engines. Moocha (talk) 18:18, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I redirected this to the best place I could find. If you still think it should be nuked, by all means have it nuked. I just didn't want stuff like that to pop up on google for too long. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 18:35, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, this should do wonderfully! Moocha (talk) 18:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Timothy Christian School
Why are you asking for my page to be deleted when it clearly meets all the required criteria?The Spock (talk) 19:02, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not asking for your page to be deleted. I am trying to get you to follow established procedure for the CSD process. If your page meets all the required criteria, an administrator currently checking the pages marked for speedy deletion will look at the proposed deletion, at the article, at the talk page comments, and will remove the tag. Please don't remove speedy deletion tags yourself, let the process take its course. Thank you. Moocha (talk) 19:05, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help and I will do as you say.The Spock (talk) 19:13, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You're most welcome - for what it's worth, I hope your page stays :). Have fun! Moocha (talk) 19:14, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Please creat a redirect for Denmark-Palestine relations
Hey Moocha could you plese create a redirect for Denmark-Palestine relations. I would really appreciate it very much. If you look at the table for Foreign relations of the Palestinian National Authority you will find out that in every country in which the bilateral relations were mentioned including China, India, Iran, Pakistan, Romania, Russia, Turkey, and the Vatican city most of them have redirects. I hope that you could allow something to be put on that table there. Please do it soon Moocha and I wish you well. I hope to continue as a contributer at Wikipedia. Instead of deleating the article you can make it into a redirect. I think a redirect is much better. Thank you. User talk:PBS RENTALS —Preceding undated comment added 19:54, 7 August 2010 (UTC).
 * Hi! Sure, consider it done :) Have fun! Moocha (talk) 19:58, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Revisions of Robert "Bob" J Giuda
Editing is executed because the references cited are inaccurate and remarks were taken out of context. There were no actual reporters present, except for a college reporter not included in the conversation. Article was written based on hearsay and candidate was never notified until after the article went to print. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cordirose (talk • contribs) 13:00, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That's all very well, but please discuss section deletions such as those you performed on the talk page of the article in question, not here. Please try to build a consensus there. Thanks. Moocha (talk) 13:24, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

same sex marriage on Robert Giuda's section
I told you once that the articles you site are in error. First of all the article in the Nashua Telegraph is not correct. The Nashua Telegraph had no reporter there at the event. That newspaper took the story from a student reporter from North Carolina who was not even a part of the conversation in fact was standing behind me with her back to me interviewing someone else. She took the conversation from hearsay from another person and students there. The Nashua Telegraph published this article without even questioning the candidate to find out if the reporting by the student was accurate. Evidently people do not understand rhetorical questions. In my belief he could have said "shepherds and their sheep, or plural marriage or license to have children and someone would have found an issue with this. My humble opinion is that this is an attempt to destroy a very viable candidate for office as for some time now (until today) no other issues were displayed. The issue of gay marriage is also not a federal candidates issue, it is a state issue. As for the WMUR interview the candidate was interviewed by said station for more than the 1 min and 48 seconds of the clip. It was so edited that the whole interview looks just like the newspaper article. There was never and I repeat never any comparison on the part of the candidate to bestiality, there was no sexualization of the issue at all by the candidate yet that is what was inferred in the article. Why is it that the only people that seem to matter here are the gay community? Did any of you at this site even ask the Telegraph who their source was? Did you see the whole interview on WMUR? There were no reporters, no recorders, and no videos at the event. All this from a simple question which the simple answer should have sufficed except that activists wanted to make it the issue of the day when we have young men dying in Afghanistan and Iraq, small business people being taxed out of existence, people losing their homes and families because there are no jobs. THOSE are the issues that should be concentrated on. There is a request to remove the entire page and I certainly hope it will be honored. For me the vandalism is in the addition of information that is inaccurate, unsubstantiated, unverified and certainly not neutral in its content.Cordirose (talk) 15:56, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * And I asked you not once, but multiple times, to use the article's talk page which you can find by clicking here or here or here or here or here or here or here to discuss any substantive changes to the article with the other Wikipedians interested in what is Wikipedia's article (not yours in particular). Please look up Consensus. Whether or not you're right is utterly beside the point I'm trying to get through to you. Now please stop spamming my talk page. Moocha (talk) 17:05, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Robert Giuda
I cannot believe all this. Just so you know I am his wife and I am terrified of what is happening and this threat to my family is not blackmail IT IS REAL. None of you were at the event. I WAS! I am telling you now my family and my husband have been threatened. I am begging you to please, please end this now —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cordirose (talk • contribs) 14:14, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, for the love of Benji. *What* do you want me to end? Are you trying to imply that I made those alleged threats, in which case I suggest seeking professional help outside of Wikipedia? Are you completely unable to understand the English language? What language do you want me to use to repeat the very same thing I already told you 4 (that is, four) different times? If you haven't understood what you need to do by now, I cannot help you since I am at the end of both my wits and my patience. Please find someone else to bother, and please stop spamming my talk page with this non-issue. Goodbye. Moocha (talk) 14:59, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Impartial Tone
Moocha, you are not exercising impartial tone towards Cordirose. That can be taken as very offensive and perhaps you need to conduct yourself accordingly and modify your tone to be constructive rather than get yourself in trouble for being offensive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ligurianbeauty (talk • contribs) 17:28, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I started out as being completely impartial about the issue and very helpful in trying to explain to Cordirose what Wikipedia is and how to follow the established dispute resolution processes. I ended up extremely annoyed at a user who clearly has a censorship agenda and threatens legal action. Additionally, this is my user page, where I do not tend to mince words. Perhaps it might be a good idea to follow check the conversation on all talk pages by clicking on Special:Contributions/Cordirose before issuing judgments, hm? Moocha (talk) 19:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Gibraltar S. Jenkins
Thanks - think it can be salted as a first attempt? -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 20:20, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, it'll take care of itself via IP block, I think... :) Moocha (talk) 20:23, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yay. I never realized vandal-fighting was so much fun. :-) -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 20:25, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * And they're gone :) Moocha (talk) 20:30, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Well. That was anti-climactic.  Thanks for your help - I was getting ready to take it to WP:ANI in desperation. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 20:33, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Anytime, don't mention it. Keep up the good work! Moocha (talk) 06:33, 11 August 2010 (UTC)