User talk:Nableezy/Archive 37

Shuafat camp
The camp it replaced was Mascar (M'ascar, Mu'ascar, M’askar, al Mu’askar, etc). Not Askar. Also I think it was a Red Cross camp not a UNRWA camp, but maybe UNRWA took it over at some point. I'm out of allowed edits for today.... Zerotalk 14:40, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Done on the title, didnt do anything with Red Cross/UNRWA.  nableezy  - 14:46, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Jerusalem RfC discussion: final countdown
Hello again, everyone. I have now closed all the questions for step four, and updated the RfC draft. We are scheduled to start the Jerusalem RfC at 09:00, 23 May 2013 (UTC). Before then, I would like you to check the draft page, Requests for comment/Jerusalem, and see if there are any errors or anything that you would like to improve. If it's a small matter of copy editing, then you can edit the page directly. If it's anything that might be contentious, then please start a discussion at Talk:Jerusalem/2013 RfC discussion. I'll check through everything and then set the RfC in motion on Thursday. Best — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 16:11, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Jerusalem RfC has started
Hello again everyone. We have finally made it - the RfC is now open, and a few editors have chimed in already. The discussion is located at Requests for comment/Jerusalem. I'm sure you don't actually need me to tell you this, but please go over there and leave your comments. :) You are the editors most familiar with the Jerusalem lead dispute on Wikipedia, so it would be very useful for the other participants to see what you have to say. And again, thank you for all your hard work in the discussions leading up to this. We shall reconvene after the results of the RfC have been announced, so that we can work out any next steps we need to take, if necessary. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 13:20, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

wdyt
 Sean.hoyland  - talk 18:34, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Its him, just needed to look at one edit to know it. Ill try to put an SPI together later on. But probably not for a few days, kind of busy this weekend.  nableezy  - 19:22, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * One edit ? Someone took it to ANI here. I guess they will just be sent to SPI. I hadn't noticed the connection to the Evidence-based sockfarm before, or more tellingly the American Clio sock.  Sean.hoyland  - talk 05:13, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah one edit, its an easy give away. Cmon man, this is me.  nableezy  - 05:15, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Reassuring to know. Ah, I see what you mean now. A Cluebot NG-like sock hunting bot with checkuser rights could be doing this.  Sean.hoyland  - talk 05:58, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Well then, I did not know how old or wide the sock farm was. Think that other user is right, Historicist was just the next account after Evidence-based. I should really pay more attention to what you write, didnt even notice you brought it up.  nableezy  - 08:02, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Arabic Wikipedia article requests
Do you do Egypt-related article requests on the Arabic Wikipedia? WhisperToMe (talk) 04:26, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Nope.  nableezy  - 04:29, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, ok. Thank you for your prompt response :) WhisperToMe (talk) 04:34, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Yazur article
Hey. I'll explain myself - I was quoting exactly what Morris wrote in his 2008 book, 1948: the history etc. Please refer to the changes I've just made in the NPOV section of the talk page so as to avoid unnecessary back-and-forth editing. Thanks Shilton (talk) 13:56, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I have that book, and you left out the bit that I added, and he doesnt say anything about anything being strictly forbidden. You removed what he wrote in Birth, which is what I added, for no apparent reason.  nableezy  - 14:09, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

?
 Sean.hoyland  - talk 10:47, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * That is interesting. Have to look into it a bit more.  nableezy  - 13:27, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Usually don't get involved in this process, but maybe also take a look at . --Al Ameer son (talk) 16:47, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I was actually thinking that, but thanks.  nableezy  - 17:26, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Adding births to "Death of" articles
I've added a birth category to "Death of" articles to help remove the pages from this report, where possible. Mark Hurd (talk) 15:42, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay, but I think it makes more sense to remove the deaths category, as I think that also belongs on the bio page, not the article on the death.  nableezy  - 16:21, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, given their relationship with Category:Living people, I agree their use on non-biography pages is dubious, but the deaths category does make sense here, and it is then simpler to include the birth... Mark Hurd (talk) 12:18, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Newbie
FYI :. Pluto2012 (talk) 19:23, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

NGO Monitor
Haaretz article on NGO Monitor editing Wikipedia. Send me email if you can't see it. Zerotalk 13:18, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * On wp:fr they won their battle : they moved the article "1948 Palestine War" to "1947-1949 Judean-Arab Conflict". No less. Let's not talk about the crisis on the article about the "State of Palestine". That's life. Pluto2012 (talk) 14:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)


 * If I am not welcomed in this page, please tell me and I won't write here again. I would like to say That this NGO group is new for me. Anyway, they are a bunch of idiots if that is what they are doing. In my opinion, those Israeli right wingers are dangerous to the future of Israel.
 * As for "they won their battle : they moved the article "1948 Palestine War" to "1947-1949 Judean-Arab Conflict". No less.", I do not understand.

In my opinion, argument like that are senseless. The Palestinian people only should decide what is the title, and it does not matter if all the rest of the world would denounce that. It is the same for the issue of Jerusalem. If the Israelis call it their capital, than it does not matter what everybody else is thinking. Ykantor (talk) 00:32, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Where it was previously?
 * 2) is "1947-1949 Judean-Arab Conflict" identical to "Arab–Israeli armed engagements" ? ( I did not find the 1st one)
 * 3) What is that bad in the new category? ( I am asking seriously)
 * concerning "Let's not talk about the crisis on the article about the "State of Palestine". That's life.".
 * 1) you mean the merging proposal?
 * 2) Say it is merged, while keeping the name "State of Palestine". is that acceptable?
 * Hi Ykantor,
 * There is a misunderstanding. This concerns another wikipedia, hopefully not this one.
 * Regarding your other comments, your mind is welcome here : Requests for comment/Jerusalem.
 * Pluto2012 (talk) 14:39, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Matityahu, Mateh Binyamin
You omitted the word city from the description of Modi'in Illit and added settlement instead. This is a mistake since Modi'in Illit is a declared city. If you want to point out that it is also an Israeli settlement beyond the 67 lines please form a sentence containing both pieces of info. It is important to say we are talking about a city as the distance between both settlements is virtually zero. Thanks, DGtal (talk) 21:42, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It is primarily known as an Israeli settlement, and that should be used when referencing it. I dont quite see why its status as a city has anything to do with the distance between it and another settlement.  nableezy  - 06:31, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I guess "primarily known" is a question of viewpoint, as most Israeli jews I know see it more as a city than an "Israeli settlement". In any case, the fact it's a city is relevant to the economic and sociological understanding of Matityahu (noting to do with politics) - there is a big difference between living in a place far from a meaningful economic centre and living in a place a few minutes walk from a city with business, transport, medical, educational and other infrastructure. Maybe whe should write: it is adjacent to the Haredi city of Modi'in Illit, another Israeli settlement, and to the city of Modi'in-Macabim-Re'ut. DGtal (talk) 12:13, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * This isnt an encyclopedia restricted to Israeli Jews. If you look at sources across the world, such as BBC, the Guardian, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Sydney Morning Herald, and so on, you can quickly see that it is in fact primarily known as a settlement. If you want to remark on its size you could say the large Israeli settlement of Modi'in Illit. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 14:26, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * OK. Can you please explain what the problem is in refering to it as bot a settelment and a city? DGtal (talk) 05:19, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I dont think it should be done because it isnt the topic of the article. The article on Modi'in Illit itself says both, but any mention of it need not also contain both. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 06:22, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * So should we accordingly also omit the word city from the mention of Modi'in Macabim Re'ut? DGtal (talk) 08:16, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thats actually a city in Israel, so I think including it there is fine. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 14:38, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Now I'm muddled up. Israeli authorities (technically IDF head of Central Command) declared Modi'in Ilit a city, so why ignore that fact? It's no more controversial than the very existance of all west bank settlements. DGtal (talk) 07:06, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * You can remove city if you you want, but I think its fine. It distinguishes between whats in Israel (the Israeli city) and whats in the West Bank (the Israeli settlement). <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 07:39, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Still I don't really understand you. You seem to claim a place cannot be a city and an Israeli settlement at the same time. DGtal (talk) 05:05, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No, I didnt say that. What a place primarily is can be one or the other. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 04:48, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I guess we disagree on that point. I believe a place can have 2 main characteristics at the same time. DGtal (talk) 05:04, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Best wishes
Hi Nab, I hope that you don't have family caught up in whatever is going on in Egypt now.--Peter cohen (talk) 17:45, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 18:23, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * What?! I am certain that members of Nableezy's family are among the brave activists at the forefront for change for a prosperous and democratic new Egypt. Chesdovi (talk) 17:58, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and they are (maybe not the forefront). <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 18:23, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

hi & Presidential elections in Egypt
I've started a debate on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Egyptian_elections. I think before 1999 elections were in fact referendums, and after 2005 elections are elections. Am I right? Should we divide the elections into two parts in that template? Kavas (talk) 02:14, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * From what I can tell thats correct. Im fine with that. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 07:18, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion
Greetings,

We've had a good faith discussion about the use of 'occupied' vs. 'administered' when applied to Golan, e.g. in the 'Rujm el-Hiri' article, and it's clear we're not going to reach consensus. Accordingly, I've created a new section on Neutral point of view/Noticeboard about this issue. Four editors have been named in the posting: you, Zero0000, Tiamut, and Supreme Deliciousness. The section may be accessed via http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Rujm_el-Hiri:_in_.27Israeli-administered.27_or_.27Israeli-occupied.27_Golan.3F or Hope we can reach a final settlement on this particular item and move on to more productive cooperation.

--Ron

Here's official notification:

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Rujm el-Hiri: in 'Israeli-administered' or 'Israeli-occupied' Golan?. Thank you. Ronreisman (talk) 22:41, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Jerusalem RfC: breakdown of results
Hello again everyone. Now that the Jerusalem RfC has been closed and there has been time for the dust to settle, I thought it would be a good time to start step six of the moderated discussion. If you could leave your feedback over at the discussion page, it will be most appreciated. — <span style="color: #194D00; font-family: Palatino, Times, serif">Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 09:38, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Comment
I posted a comment in a discussion you participated in. -- Jreferee (talk) 12:00, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Greetings, earthling
I have seen from User talk:Sean.hoyland you might be a joy to have around here. It's my idea for an anti-WikiProject WikiProject since NPOVN and WikiProject neutrality might not be the best formats to corral and focus editors on the neutrality issue. That's my hypothesis at least. Sean is also invited. Best regards. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. ) while signing a reply, thx 16:49, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Books and Bytes Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 by , Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Read the full newsletter ''Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:52, 27 October 2013 (UTC)''

Your userbox
Since two sides of a conflict can have a border dispute, and since you support the right of whichever side views itself as occupied by the other, won't this just lead to a series of escalating conflicts until one side ethnically cleanses the other... or worse? I mean, in certain conflicts, both sides may have a case that the other side was the initial aggressor, and anyway, this 'right to resist occupation' exists by Hobbes's 'right of nature', where an actor can choose to act to dissolve an existing peace in order to gain itself an advantage. However, resistance comes with attached consequences. So unless a weaker party is fighting literally for survival (Polish and Jewish Partisans, for instance) or fighting in concert with some external liberating army (French & Italian Resistance, for instance), then it seems like there is no way to gain anything from violent resistance beyond an agreement to negotiate with the occupying power. However, if negotiations are opened and go nowhere because of unreasonable demands on the side of the 'resistance' (and in a realpolitik sense, it is the resistance that makes demands and the occupier who makes concessions (implicitly the resistance is bargaining using its power to cause problems for the occupier.)). Then this ultimately means that the 'resistance's' demands can only be in proportion with its ability to cause disruptions. If the concessions demanded by the 'resistance' exceed the damage that the resistance can extract, then the occupier will move to crush the resistance.

So your userbox supports a situation wherein "It is consequent also to the same condition that there be no propriety, no dominion, no mine and thine distinct; but only that to be every man's that he can get, and for so long as he can keep it."

But Hobbes deduces from this state of nature together with any man's (or any nation's) inherent goal of self-preservation his first Law of Nature: "The first Law of nature is that every man ought to endeavour peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it; and when he cannot obtain it, that he may seek and use all helps and advantages of war."

So in sum, either the 'resistance' must somehow obtain power enough to guarantee its claims (and in the conflict we are not talking about, there seems to be little chance of recruiting any army willing to implement the "coastal resistance's plan of genocide", or to implement the "inland resistance's" territorial aims. Since waiting for these is waiting for Godot, then the 'resistance' is ultimately going to have to make claims that will be acceptable to the occupier, or to continue armed resistance until the 'occupying power' gets fed up with it and implements an expulsion or an extensive COIN plan (like the British suppression of insurgents in Malaya), both of which involve collective punishment.  International law is not a suicide pact, and in the absence of chapter 7 resolutions against the 'occupying power', there is no chance that the residents of the 'ethnically cleansed land' will ever be able to return once that becomes a fait accompli. So anyway, you should change your userbox from defending the right of occupied people to resist against occupiers and instead change it to "negotiate against the occupiers", since that is the only plan that won't lead to another 'naqbah'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.44.174.192 (talk) 08:31, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Found a nice quote for you: Merit is no qualification for freedom. Bulgars, Afghans, and Tahitans have it. Freedom is enjoyed when you are so well armed, or so turbulent, or inhabit a country so thorny that the expense of your neighbour's occupying you is greater than the profit. - T.E. Lawrence — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.44.174.192 (talk) 09:09, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 15:54, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Al-Ras al-Ahmar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 7th Armored Brigade (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Hey bro
I don't remember if I ever wrote back to you after you Christmas wishes the year before last and I have missed you anyway so I just wanted to say hi and let you know you are thought of often. I hope you and yours are managing the Arab spring/summer/fall/winter (rinse and repeat) without sustaining too much damage to your inner beings. Don't worry, be happy ... this too shall pass.  T i a m u t talk 19:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Question
Any thoughts on who this user may be? Darkness Shines (talk) 16:17, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Your input is required on the topic of Syrian Civil War maps
Dear user, you input is required on the question whether adding Israel as 5th belligerent to Syrian Civil War maps is legitimate, due to you previous participation on Syrian map module in June 2013. Please discuss it at talk:Syrian Civil War.GreyShark (dibra) 08:59, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

This is a dishonest and non neutral comment and inappropriate canvassing. The discussion is not to ad Israel as 5th belligerent to Syrian Civil War maps, but to show that in a map showing the "Current military situation in Syria" Israel is occupying the Golan heights. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 13:04, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

AE result
I felt it would be appropriate to drop you a line regarding your AE complaint against Plot Spoiler. There's a tendency at AE to think that a lack of tangible action against the respondent is a 'lack mark' of sorts against the complainant, and I wanted to clarify that my closure of the complaint with just a caution to PS in this instance should not be seen as evidence of any wrongdoing on your part. It was not, in my opinion, a frivolous or vexatious request. I believe you filed it in go faith, and the main reason for the lack of action was that, by the time admins got to the bottom of the 1RR violation and the various other issues raised in the thread, the matter was stale. Please feel free to file a complaint about Plot Spoiler or anybody else in the future should you feel that their conduct shod be examined by admins. Regards, HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  18:38, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * No worries, though I thought it was pretty straight forward. I think something should be done about the repeated behavior of multiple reverts without ever discussing, but I havent really been all that active so maybe things have changed. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 01:31, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on a revert of mine on Karmei Tzur
An edit warring case was opened against me on Karmei Tzur page. I deleted the picture that was related to the 'anarchists against the wall' content you deleted and thus seem to be reinstated by you by mistake. I would appreciate it if you comment on it. Thanks, Ashtul (talk) 19:28, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

== Throw off the shackles of Arab imperialism and return to your Samaritan roots. ==

Only then will people take you seriously. Let not the sacrifices of your ancestors be in vain. Do not forget the millions of Samaritans who rose up against the Romans to preserve their heritage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SamariaRemembered (talk • contribs) 09:20, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I remember the first time this Watsonian (dumb), rather than Sherlockian (clever) inference, was made from Nableezy's handle.Nishidani (talk) 09:23, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

General comment
Hey, if I am coming off a little confrontational, I apologize. I don't mean to. Goalie1998 (talk) 15:33, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 * You havent been, no worries. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 06:18, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

By analogy, it explains much of the I/P issues
just replace black with Palestinian. Gary Younge, 'Farewell to America,' The Guardian 1 July 2015.Nishidani (talk) 11:38, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * yeah i saw this. different problems i think though. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 06:20, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hate to ruin even 10 minutes of your Saturday but
I note that there is an imminent possibility that Kingsindian will have an AE report. He was alerted 1 and a half hours after his edit, but it being Saturday evening here, there's a strong possibility he may be out. Could you give the sequence of edits he made today at Sabra and Shatila massacre a glance and tell me briefly if he has broken the rule? If so, I'll drop a note on his page. Sorry for the bother.Nishidani (talk) 21:20, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Faget about it. KI already has reverted. Have a good afternoon and evening.Nishidani (talk) 21:36, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Eid Mubarak
Kul sinna wa inta salem y'akhi. --Al Ameer (talk) 03:48, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Wenta bi saha wa salama inshallah y'akhi. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 04:03, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks
A few of us knew that Averysoda and Al Rows 4 were socks, I 'knew' he was NoCal100 though only on tone (which is like a thumbprint except it's subjective, lacki ng a material correlative), without empirical proof (well, Sean.hoyland is a dab hand also at that kind of science) but, whatever you know about this is beyond me. A thankful dope. Highest regards Nishidani (talk) 21:18, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Honestly, if the man would stop being a pest I wouldnt care. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 02:23, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Jeez, I can't believe you two are still at this. JGGardiner (talk) 10:42, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
 * lol, im not really. Just got bored and thought Id check in for a bit. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 15:55, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Hey, no judgement. I was just a little concerned.  But it's good to see you guys.  I hope that you're well.  JGGardiner (talk) 22:36, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Editor of the Week
User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

With over 28,000 edits, User Nableezy is a quality editor in one of our most contentious topics, the Israel/Palestine conflict, who, despite the frankly amazing number of personal attacks he has been subject to, including being attacked by accounts with names like User:Nableezy is a sleezy Arab, User:Nableezy is an Arab Nazi, User:Nableezy with head blown off, User:Nableezy with head blown off2, and User:Nableezy with head blown off3, still hasn't quit as many others including myself might have under such provocation. He slowed his editing in 2014 after working at articles like Gaza War (2008-09) and Al-Azhar Mosque and projects WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration, WikiProject Israel, and WikiProject Palestine. Having recently returned to active editing, the Award would thank him for past participation under duress and welcome his return. This nomination was seconded, with pleasure, by User:L235.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

Thanks again for your efforts! . <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:black">Buster Seven  <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:black"> Talk  15:33, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your work. God bless,  Go  Phightins  !  01:53, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I stay away from things political, but I am glad there are folks like you that don't. Keep up the good work.  I normally only thank EOTW winners that I have nominated or that I work with sometimes, and that's not you, cause I don't do politics, ever.  But I thanked you cause you are one tough cookie, a trait I admire, and I wanna help defend your talk page, so now you are on my watchlist!  Thanks! John from Idegon (talk) 19:59, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Congratulations, Nableezy! Liz  <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><b style="color:#006400;">Read!</b> <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 20:22, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much, appreciated. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 16:36, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * And congratulations from me, to! Good to see you around, Huldra (talk) 22:35, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Editor for the weak is a more enduring way of putting his contribution, 'weak' in the sense of a legitimate historical population grossly under-represented, or consistently strongarmed into a low profile or a terrorist caricature by large numbers of IPs or hostile partisans, for too long on Wikipedia.Nishidani (talk) 20:01, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 22:14, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Well deserved, for your persistence in countering systemic bias. --NSH001 (talk) 06:43, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, did you edit at the Gaza War article? I knew that I recognized you from somewhere.  Congrats anyway.  JGGardiner (talk) 23:48, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Some ammo to stoke the game, JGG. Chicago in roman dialect is pronounced 'Shi cago''(=ci caco), heard as 'I shit there':)Nishidani (talk) 07:45, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

WP:WIKIHOUNDING
Kindly cease WP:WIKIHOUNDING me. You make even the slightest attempt to maintain NPOV on Israel/Arab pages  a pretext for harrassment.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:27, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Uhh, no. You edit pages I watch and introduce bullshit. Ill correct that accordingly. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 17:29, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Ben White
There are two Ben Whites (well, more, actually, but two contenders for the title "journalist" Benjamin White) One, now moved by you to Ben White (journalist)  is a freelance writer, political activist, and paid employee of a series of non-for-profits, although his employment history is hard to source. Your source, is an old author bio on The Guardian which actually describes him as a ""freelance journalist, writer, and human rights activist". He was apparently never  an employee of the Guardian; he placed freelance articles with them.  although the most recent of those was  several years ago .  I moved him to Ben White (activist) as a more accurate description, but also because I was looking to make a page for the other Ben White, who is in fact a  well-known, professional journalist.  I started a page for him, Ben White (finance journalist), an awkward title to be sure, but "Ben White (journalist)" was occupied by this other Ben White.  I think the page name  "Ben White ( journalist)" properly  belongs to the Ben White who is an actual, even a notable,  working journalist.  What is the Wikipedia etiquette on naming in this kind of situation?E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:59, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I dont think you understand what a freelance journalist is. Its a journalist not employed by a specific news outlet. Also, please dont confuse the order of things here. I moved that article back to its original title, it wasnt simply now moved by [me]. And I dont believe activist is a more accurate description. If you want to move all the pages you can follow the procedure outlined at WP:RM. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 19:44, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * But do you agree that "Ben White (journalist" should lead here Ben White? And if not, why not?E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:53, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I dont particularly care. Move the other one to Ben White (freelance journalist) if you want. What I care about is using activist as the primary descriptor through the disambiguation when it isnt what the sources primarily describe him as. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 20:17, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

AE Statement
I've made a statement on the ARE report. You said your piece and I've said mine. But don't think that I can't read your obsession and aggression between the lines.WikiMania76 (talk) 17:47, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * lol, okay. Have a good time with that. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 18:07, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Comment left on 's userpage - "AFD"
Hi, I've been watching 's talkpage for a while after a minor incident involving refactoring/removal of content from AFDs, and noticed your message left there. Are you referring to this removal of your vote from Articles_for_deletion/2015_Rosh_HaShanah_death_by_stone-throwing? samtar (msg) 18:03, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
 * yep. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 19:46, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

DRN for Duma
Here. Settleman (talk) 06:35, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Your Filing at DRN
Can you be more specific in your DRN case summary here? For example, you mention "A reliable source," which source are you referring to? Also, this generalization "the material that Settleman objects to" does not make the case clearer to DRN volunteers. Please be aware that although lengthy discussion may have taken place off DRN, the discussions there appear to be quite political and unclear. Also, add clarity to your report on DRN, not here. --JustBerry (talk) 14:05, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

IR
If I may interrupt your coughing for a second, could you examine Settleman's complaint on my page re Ir. Before doing my second last edit on the Palestinian stone-throwing page, I examined my other edits and could not see any reverts, as opposed to additions. But then I am a mug on 1R, and tired for several reasons. If I have broken the rule could you notify me on my page, and I will correct it tomorrow. Thanks, if you are reading this and act on it!Nishidani (talk) 21:59, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Sharafat
I saw you called this reverting nonsense. Just that you know, the neighborhood is indeed mainly Arab, and whether the West Bank was liberated or occupied is a point of view. So the edit was POV, not nonsense. Debresser (talk) 08:25, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I dont know if you want me to take you seriously or not, but claiming there is no such thing as a Palestinian and that they are all just "Arabs" and putting the idea that EJ or the WB was "liberated" on the same footing as they are "occupied" is probably not going to make me do so. K thnx bye. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 15:49, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The only thing you have to take seriously, is that your usage of the word "nonsense" was not justified. I don't care about your outside-Wikipedia opinions, just your onsite-Wikipedia behavior. Debresser (talk) 22:31, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
 * That was nonsense. My use of the word was appropriate. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 05:33, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Since you allow me to be uncivil, let me just say that being stubborn as a donkey about something that is so obviously true, does not show much intelligence or positive attitude. Debresser (talk) 15:40, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Saying something as stupid as whether the West Bank was liberated or occupied is a point of view shows a positive attitude, in that one is oblivious to how foolish they look, but not much intelligence. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 17:25, 5 November 2015 (UTC)