User talk:Ostiferia

Wow!!!

List of countries by Human Development Index
You currently seem to be engaged in an edit war in the article, List of countries by Human Development Index with User:Tocino. Please read WP:Edit war to understand what vandalism is and that edit warring is harmful. My advice for you is to try and gain more input on the matter being debated on the talk page or through an RfC in a calm and civil manner. Any further edit warring without an attempt to gain a consensus may result in a block. Thanks very much. Tbo 157  (talk)  19:55, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

ISRAEL
HOW COMES THE ISRAEL PAGED IS LOCKED WE NEED TO SHOW THAT ISRAEL RECEIVED 3 TRILLION DOLLARS FROM THE USA TO DEVELOP ITS ECONOMY. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.238.174 (talk) 11:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't know who has locked the article Israel. Not me.
 * As far as I know, Israel receives every year - not 3 trillion - but 3 billion, which is less than 2% of its GDP.
 * As far as I know, 2% is also the percentage of jews in the US.
 * As far as I know, not only Israel but also other countries in the Middle East receive billions from other countries. For example, Egypt receives every year 2.2 billions from US. Why does Israel receive 3 billions while Egypt receives 2.2 billion only? I don't know; Maybe because of the percentage of jews in US. Anyway, the difference between 3 and 2.2 is not that dramatic.
 * Have a nice day, and next time - please sign your name.
 * Ostiferia (talk) 12:31, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * HELLO AGAIN AS I RECALL I DIDNT SAY EVERY YEAR MAYBE YOU SHOULD READ MY COMMENT CAREFULLY ISRAEL HAS RECEIVED 3 TRILLION DOLLARS SO FAR WHY DOESNT EGYPT GET TRILLIONS INSTEAD OF BILLIONS ?? ISRAELS ECONOMY IS TOTALLT BAED UPON THE TRILLIONS DONATED BY U.S.A YET THE AMERICANS MOAN AND GROAN OVER MONEY HANDED TO EGYPT WHICH IS NOTHING COMPARED TO ISRAELI CHARITY —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.238.174 (talk) 16:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello.
 * As I recall - I have never approved your claim about trillions. Why didn't I approve your claim? because your claim was definitely incorrect: Neither Israel nor Egypt have received trillions. The correct fact is just that Israel receives 3 billions a year, and Egypt receives 2.2 billions a year.
 * As I recall - I have never approved your claim that Israel's economy is totally dependent on the money Israel receives from US. Why didn't I approve your claim? because your claim was definitely incorrect: The correct fact is just that Israel receives every year about 2% of Israel's annual GDP. No doubt, 2% is little money - compared to the Israeli annual GDP, just as the annual amount of money given to Egypt by US - is little money - compared to the Egyptian annual GDP.
 * As I recall - I have already answered your question about the difference between Israel and Egypt: I said that the difference between 3 and 2.2 is not that dramatic, and maybe the 3 billions Israel receives every year from US - which are about 2% of Israel's annual GDP, have much to do with the percentage of jews in US - which is also about 2% of the American population. Maybe.
 * Anyway, I can't understand why you've decided to refer to me: I'm not the donor. I'm not american, nor am I Israeli, nor am I egyptian (I'm pakistani). Please refer to the US, and ask them all of your interesting questions, maybe they have better answers.
 * Now it's my turn to ask you a question: Why don't you sign your name?
 * Have a nice day, and next time sign your name, as I do.
 * Ostiferia (talk) 20:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * WELL MISTER PAKISTANI LET ME GIVE YOU A FACT ISRAEL HAS RECIEVED 3 TRILLION DOLLARS SO FAR —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.66.246 (talk) 11:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Asallam Alaykum. Is this anon bothering you? Perhaps you should report him to WP:ANI.Khuda Hafiz. Also see Jeff Rense to assess the credibility of his "source". Ghanadar galpa (talk) 16:01, 8 January 2008 (UTC)


 * He doesn't bother me, but he should sign, why doesn't he? Anyway, I can't understand why he asks me questions about the american policy in the middle east, while I'm not american, nor do I live in the middle east.
 * The source he has provided doesn't indicate Israel has received trillions of dollars, but that "The Costs to American Taxpayers of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: $3 Trillion", and the source gives examples: the 1973 war which was opened by the arab countries against Israel - caused the "1973 oil crisis", while "The 1973 oil crisis, all in all, cost the U.S. economy no less than $900 billion, and probably as much as $1,200 billion". The writer adds similar examples, all of which are intended to prove that the american international policy of supporting Israel cost 1.8 trillions of dollars, but the writer does not indicate US has given Israel trillions of dollars. Why? because that is wrong.
 * I don't know the writer Jeff Rense in that source, but according to Wikipedia, this writer supports "UFO reporting, paranormal phenomena, conspiracy theories", etc.
 * Ostiferia (talk) 16:34, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Ivory Coast
Please observe the middle course as was determined between all editors a month ago. Thanx. Manstorius (talk) 23:47, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

List of countries by Human Development Index‎
Please stop edit-warring on this article. The main article for that nation is at Côte d'Ivoire, and I note that the United Nations hasn't called it "Ivory Coast" in more than 22 years. Perhaps more importantly, the primary (in fact, only) source for this article (here) is a UN-sourced document, and uses "Côte d'Ivoire" (and "Timor-Leste", by the way ), so I think it would be a violation of No original research for us to "make corrections" to what the UN says. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:58, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Please stop edit-warring
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 00:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I've never made more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period, because I'm committed to Wikipedia rules. Furthermore, I haven't performed a "large" number of reversions, and my number of reversions is less than yours, so any idea to block an editor who has made less reversions than the editor who desires to block the first editor - is a simple testimony for the second editor's unabilty to refer to the very arguments of the first editor.
 * If I'd had the same technical power as you have while you hadn't had it, I wouldn't have used it, but rather - would have faced your arguments in order to convince and to get convinced, but the way of blocking one's colleague (who is a legitimate wikiped just as one is) - is simply unfair. If you think my arguments are weak - you're invited to prove your position, and I'll be happy to face your arguments - untill one of us conceives the other. Note that I can never predict who will have the stronger arguments in any future discussion between us.
 * Ostiferia (talk) 08:20, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, but you and Andrwsc are still in dispute, whereas either one holds a (new) legitimate position, and both of you haven't been able to convince each other yet, so you can't expect Andrwsc should meanwhile adopt your (new) position of indicating both names: "Timor Leste", "Côte d'Ivoire" in parenthesis only (just as he can't expect you should adopt his position), so we still have to look for the middle course - untill the whole issue is resolved (e.g. by the Mediation Cabal). I hope you understand well the situation. Manstorius (talk) 11:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


 * All right. The Mediation Cabal can really be a satisfactory solution. Ostiferia (talk) 16:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Additionally, please avoid changing the status quo (i.e. the middle course) untill we arrive at a common accepted resolution. Manstorius (talk) 16:53, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

article tags
You do realize, don't you, that is a redirect to, so your edit was absolutely pointless. Hope this helps. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, but we still have to replace (this tag as you've correctly done in another article) by the more correct one: - in order to focus the dispute. Goodbye.Ostiferia (talk) 11:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)