"I am a Palestinian. Hath not a Palestinian eyes? Hath not a Palestinian hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as a Jew is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that -- the villainy you teach me, I will execute; and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction." Tariq Ali's take on Shakespeare in the Khaleej Times

Archive #1 by Werdnabot /Archive 2 /Archive 3 /Archive 4 /Archive 5 /Archive 6 /Archive 7 /Archive 8 /Archive 9

On 18 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Place names in Palestine, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

~ User:Ameliorate! ^{(with the !) (talk)} 05:21, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this will sweeten you day! Take care, Huldra (talk) 11:12, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Do you know anything about the photographer Fadil Saba from Nazareth? (Besides what is mentioned in the Karimeh Abbud article.) I have made a cat. for his photos (postcards) on the commons: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Fadil_Saba

Sweet Huldra. I love jellybeans! Thanks. :)

I have heard of Fadil Saba. His photography legacy is locally famous here. Will look for English sources to pass on to you and see what I can find in Arabic too. Good to hear from you again.

And thanks again for the candy. Tiamut^talk 11:18, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have also seen older postcards by a "N. Saba, Nazareth", like this from 1899: [1] Perhaps a relative? And enjoy your candy, it is well deserved! Huldra (talk) 14:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will ask some my elders here in Nazareth if Fadil had a brother he worked with (I recall someone mentioning something about that) to see if we can get a full name for this "N" initial. I tried to find English-language sources, but they are very few (one from the Palestine Exploration Fund which I can't access the full text of and a couple that refeence his photos only). So it looks like Arabic sources will be the main preserve of where information about him might be found. I'll see what I can do, and get back to with more, if I find it. Tiamut^talk 15:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And same to you! Very pleasant editing with you, indeed! (..and I cannot say that about *all* editors that I meet in the ME-area... no need to mention names ;-D ) Have a nice evening..and I hope Al Almeer son is happy with the expansion of Nabi Rubin, Cheers, Huldra (talk) 19:13, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Q-D-S, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

17:31, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

مـرحـبـا,

I'm so sorry to see you being plagued with this continuing nightmare. I do think Nishidani's advice simply to ignore him is the best course – which is more-or-less what I've been doing. Not so easy for you, though, if he keeps trampling all over your work.

I noticed that you mentioned J's latest action on Ryan's talk page, as his mentor Durova wasn't around. I just thought I should mention that Avi is also mentoring J (at my suggestion, and with Durova's agreement, and AFAIAA this is still the case) and that you could raise future problems with Avi, if you so wish. I believe J is more likely to heed Avi's wise advice than either of us, and I trust Avi's discretion on this.

تحياتي --NSH001 (talk) 22:42, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS. One of the few things my late father said about his experience as a Japanese PoW - he worked on the Burma Railway - was that the best way of dealing with the horrors was sometimes simply to laugh at them. (The memories were so horrific for him that he refused to talk about it, and we knew better than to ask, but very rarely something would trigger a remark.) Just a thought.

A Palestinian refugee from Lebanon] told me the same thing: "If we don't laugh, we die (figuratively speaking, as in the soul does)." Anyway, it's good food for thought. Thank you. Tiamut^talk 23:54, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re your edit, I'm not sure that it is necessary to actually give the source in the text when it is referenced anyway. The Middle East is not my area of expertise and I realise that how the various peoples are described may be a sensitive area. Also, attitudes in the 1930s were different to attitudes today. For that reason, I'm not going to revert the change you made. I will propose a new version of that paragraph and post it on the article talk page so that consensus may be obtained. Your comments would be welcome there. Mjroots (talk) 03:07, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you get my e-mail with the text from WCF's book? Mjroots (talk) 20:24, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied on article's talk page re your proposed new paragraph. Mjroots (talk) 07:06, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's beautiful stuff in there, Tiamut. Great work. I must start harassing you myself, if this is what you can achieve under stress!Nishidani (talk) 16:24, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Q-D-Š, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Not appropriate for English Wikipedia, as it is not about an English language concept.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Editor2020 (talk) 23:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just started Nabi Shu'ayb, but I did not research it much (mostly used the source you gave and a web page). You should add to it whenever your free. Maybe we could do a joint DYK nomination? Also, I will later ask Huldra for a(n) image(s) of the shrine or festivals held at the shrine. --Al Ameer son (talk) 01:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It'll be tough getting 4,000 more bytes, but we should definitely try. I will add a Demographics section that should be of decent size. I'll also look for more history of the village. Also, what do you think about mentioning Jethro taking refuge in Hittin in the article? --Al Ameer son (talk) 02:50, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yea I forgot the time difference. Good night. --Al Ameer son (talk) 03:05, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should go ahead and nominate it because I'm at school right now, and won't be back home for about 4 hours. Nice job expanding the article, as well Hittin. --Al Ameer son (talk) 17:46, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		Civility Award
		For managing to put across your frank views on the anecdotes relating to the Moses Montefiore Windmill without resorting to personal attacks and an edit war. Mjroots (talk) 12:29, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of massacres during the 1948 Arab–Israeli war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page 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. Oo7565 (talk) 18:17, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the passerby, I was reverting the blanking of the entire page by an anon IP. Using bots to pass out these messages maybe? Tiamut^talk 22:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Tiamut! I just started an article on al-Lajjun, but I got nothing on British Mandate times and the village's capture by Israel. Could you please help me start/expand those parts of the article. I asked Huldra to help too. Hell, this could be another joint-DYK and as I was telling Huldra, like Bayt Jibrin, maybe we could make this article a Good article. I'm already planning Geography and Archaeology sections. --Al Ameer son (talk) 07:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don´t think there is anything wrong with the time-stamps (?) ..it is just that you, I and al Almeer son conduct a conversation over (at least) 3 user-talk-pages + (at least) 3 article-talk-pages + in all the edit-summaries...I have given up remembering what I read where ;- ) Anyway, take care, go to sleep, knowing you have done a good job. Cheers, and good night, Huldra (talk) 18:27, 21 November 2008 (UTC)(PS: did you get the Abulhawa-book? I sent it to the Nazareth-library before x-mas last year, and forgot to ask you)[reply]

Worried that there might be some intrusive political battle in the air, I sought of DBachmann's advice, on how to handle these pages, and he answered here [2]. Cripes, it would be a pity if all this fresh work were removed. Perhaps I shouldn't have asked. In any case, I thought you and the pages should be notified. Perhaps some measures can be thought out preemptively, in case this issue were to come up. Think about it. Sorry for the bother I may have inadvertently caused.Nishidani (talk) 15:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Phew, that's a relief! Apart from their intrinsic interest, we do need pages where a wikipedian can simply write to snuff, without the constant harassment of the usual contentious I/P kind, though on I/P issues. I'd like to edit, but am very busy, just sneaking about and intruding like a bad smell on one or two pages when I get the time. Like my mother of old, though, a pharmacist, am always on call, if I can be of help.Nishidani (talk) 17:10, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for intruding. I had a thought, after someone posted the Arabic equivalent (ar.Wikipedia) tag(?) for the 1973 oil crisis. The thought was, how connected are these articles, or are they totally different? Were they developed from a different, local consensus, or were they transliterated from .en.wiki. What differences are included; what gems in en.wiki’s have been hasbara’d to get or keep out? I’m not thinking about the bile and highly pov’d stuff, I’m looking for glaring ref-able holes related to the ‘real world’ and historic/political events and their aftermaths. Like these, [3], [4], [5], [6], for example. You had a question about the last one, which has been answered and helpful.

A question: Have these thoughts about ar.Wiki been discussed or noted before? Ana mabarf. Regards, CasualObserver'48 (talk) 04:36, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

None taken, and somehow it just doesn’t surprise me, but I am a cynic at times and places. It sounds like the modern era’s Shibboleth to me; what goes around, comes around. Let me think on it for a while, to see if I can find some probable candidates worth your work. How much of a sniff test can you do with just a quick read through, without written translation?

I am interested in creating something with the article that you had question about; it sure wouldn’t be easy, but it might lead to understanding…if not agreement. You might also be interested in this, which I bought while on my wiki-break. Regards,CasualObserver'48 (talk) 13:31, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Lajjun at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed. There still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 08:03, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Hittin at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed. There still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 20:38, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I picked this article up from wikiproject palestine's need to assure neutrality (it was quite simple to get it done really), but if you see the article now its come under dipute again. I am trying to tell the edit that his link may well be valid but it's wrong here, yet he insists on putting it here. Some of these hot-topic israel-Palestine issues are totally run by opinion here. I gave on allegation of zionist terror and, oddly, the holocaust article. but it has to stop somewhere.

ps- I created Indo-Palestinian relations. Should I put it on the wikiproject palestine page to get more updates? Although a map would be nice for this? Lihaas (talk) 04:19, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am on the same page as you on this over-zealous editors. Only that sometimes it never dies down. But I'll monitor the page, I actually only found it from WP Palestine's list of NPOV articles (of which more could use such edits)

Thanks though. Lihaas (talk) 16:45, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 23 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article K-B-D, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

19:11, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Tiamut. You have new messages at WT:DYK.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

On 24 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lajjun, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 07:21, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Love you. I didn't answer right away because I am away, touring Egypt. --Ravpapa (talk) 19:16, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hittin, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 19:31, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 26 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nabi Shu'ayb, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 14:13, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great job expanding Jericho's history! Every few minutes I see a new improvement in the article on my watchlist. I'll try to find more on the Arab caliphate and Ottoman history, and as always, will add a Demographics section. --Al Ameer son (talk) 17:54, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added just a bit on it being a principal city in Jund Filastin, however le Strange's Palestine under the Moslems on page 396-397 contains a large quote by al-Muqaddasi as well as others by Yaqut al-Hamawi, Abu-l Fida, and Ali of Herat. I'm logging off right now, so go ahead and take anything useful from the quotes. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:11, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and added some info. There's something interesting that Yaqut says: "The city is named after Ariha ibn Malik ibn Arfakshad ibn Sam ibn Nuh. I'm not sure if its true, so I didn't add it. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:25, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You write: > Perhaps we could work on representing the differing opinions regarding the extent of the archaeological evidence? Your formulations seem to present Bagatti's work as confirmation of your thesis regarding a lack of settlement in the first century. Others seem to think differently, as evidenced above. All significant viewpoints should be represented to achieve NPOV. Tiamuttalk 16:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello Tiamut. The difficulty is that the "alternate" opinion (no Nazareth at the turn of the era) has long been suppressed, though it's been around for a very long time. It's found in scattered dictionary articles (going back to Encyclopedia Biblica, 1899), in the articles of Atheist Frank Zindler, and perhaps most substantially in my own recent book on the subject: THE MYTH OF NAZARETH: THE INVENTED TOWN OF JESUS (American Atheist Press,March 2008). See http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Nazareth-Invented-Town-Jesus/dp/1578840031/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1206072072&sr=8-1 People should start citing this book soon. Since Wiki has a "no personal research" policy, I can only cite the work of others (such as H.P. Kuhnen). Incidentally, the book is available through my website at a discount: www.nazarethmyth.info. It is necessary reading for anyone who wishes to write about Nazareth history.

To respond to your remarks, I use Bagatti's work but do not accept his conclusions, which are tendentious. You should note this, as you have written Wiki articles on the Church of the Annunciation, etc. Other archaeologists (e.g., Israeli) have reviewed Bagatti's specific findings and have come to different conclusions. But their reports are scattered, obscure, and in various languages. I have collected all that data in THE MYTH OF NAZARETH. The result is a very new (and more correct) history of the settlement, one which contradicts the Gospel accounts of Jesus "of Nazareth." This point of view is now the subject of professional discussion among scholars (e.g., Amherst, N.Y. in two weeks).

I think that the Wiki article would benefit from having the extensive Chad Emmett material severely abbreviated or deleted. Emmett was not knowledgeable on Nazareth archaeology, and his views on the matter should not be cited.

In general, there is no NPOV possible. Rather, we have two mutually-exclusive positions presently articulated in scholarship, both of which should be represented in the article: (A) The majority opinion: a named village of Nazareth existed at the turn of the era in Lower Galilee; (B) The minority opinion: a named village of Nazareth in Lower Galilee came into existence between the two Jewish Wars (c. 70-130 CE). The minority opinion is gaining currency but is still very much "underground" as it were.

I have a suggestion that requires a wholesale rewrite of the article. If you agree that we delete (or drastically reduce) the Chad Emmett material, then I will agree to move the minority opinion (B) to the section "Contrary views regarding Jesus at Nazareth." However, there will still need to be full clarification of the actual archaeological facts (with references) in the section "Earliest History & archaeological evidence." I would be willing to draft an article and send it to you for preliminary "vetting" if you like. Renejs (talk) 20:37, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

rjs-at-epud.net

Hi, I think I´m finished adding to Kafr Lam, your turn now to ce and adding! (and thanks for starting the article!) Anyway, if your friends in Nazareth recieved a parcel from Sweden, it was not from me! (I´m based further west..) Anyway, take care, and I hope Kafr Lam makes a DYK, cheers, Huldra (talk) 19:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear that the book never arrived (again: I strongly recommend it). Oh well. Glad to see that Kafr Lam made it to DYK! (even with the almost inevitable consequenses [7]. ) WP:Palestine is building stone upon stone (or rather pebble upon pebble ;-P). It is always great to edit with you ...Take care,Huldra (talk) 19:21, 5 December 2008 (UTC) PS: I saw you noted Hittin as a "new article"...but is that quite correct? Oh well, not very important. I hardly start articles these days; there is more than enough to do expanding those that are already here..[reply]

Sorry Tiamut, but you reinserting that material into the Hummus article has pretty much rid me of any respect or GF that I had for your editing. You know full well that the material is being used to turn an article about a foodstuff into an attack article, and I'm quite shocked that you are willing to play along with it. пﮟოьεԻ 57 16:43, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TBH, talkpage discussions on this kind of issue are completely pointless because they just go in circles. I've been in them before with the likes of Jaakobou and PalestineRemembered and nothing good comes from them; the only thing that happens is that good editors are driven away from such topics because they are not as persistent and tenditious as the POV pushers. The fact that the material is reliably sourced is irrelevant, because the material is unwarranted and completely undue.

Any editor "working hard to include" that kind of material should be topic-banned on sight because they are doing nothing but poisoning the well. If someone wants to write about that kind of nonsense, then I'm sure there's an article out there about cultural wars in the Middle East. пﮟოьεԻ 57 16:52, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've already written to you on your talk page about your wholesale deletion of this reliably sourced material which three editors have voiced support for including on the talk page. If you lose good faith towards me simply because you disagree with my position (and that of two other editors) there could not have been much there to begin with. I'm quite shocked that you would unilaterally impose your own view onto a page without engaging in any form of discussion. And you accuse me of bad judgement? Please. There are right ways and wrong ways to approach a disagreement over content. You just exemplified the latter. Tiamut^talk 16:47, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS - I haven't lost faith in you because I disagree with your position, I've lost faith in you because you've clearly lost the ability to think in terms of NPOV. пﮟოьεԻ 57 16:52, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Self-reflection anyone? Tiamut^talk 17:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not self-reflection at all. You seem to have forgotten that I spoke out about pro-Israel bias in articles many times and pushed for the banning of several editors for such behaviour. However, there has been a shift in editing weight over the past 18 months; many of the pro-Israel lot (e.g. Tewfik, Humus sapiens, Isarig etc) have left, but there has not been an equal decline in the number of pro-Palestinian editors (whose number has possibly actually grown with the addition of the likes of Imad marie). I've certainly noticed that 18 months ago most articles had pro-Israel bias, whereas now it seems to be anti-Israel - before it was difficult to keep the Kach article in a state where it made it clear that it was a banned terrorist organisation - now that kind of stuff keeps creeping into the Likud article.

I'm sorry if I was overly harsh earlier, but I've recently been dealing with some unpleasant editors in Irish-related POV pushing (and actually temporarily retired from editing as I was getting so sick of national bias), but I am genuinely disappointed that you can't see that the Hummus article is very clearly an attack article with the inclusion of all that cultural theft stuff. пﮟოьεԻ 57 17:45, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"cultural theft stuff"? Tiamut, I am not yet sure what Number 57 is referring to because I just took a look at the article after seeing something on AN/I. I think it is correct to follow what is said in sources according to WP:verify, but if there is a POV issue driving this, that would be disappointing. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 19:52, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi Tiamut! Thank you for your arguments in hummus debate. Wikipedia should include all relevent information if it can be found in mainstream publication and reflect different aspect of international view. Censoring one aspect of information, even if found disagreeable by some people, is dis service to world. i dont know why other people do not understand this. thanks. Ani medjool (talk)

Hey Tiamut: I have kind of a strange question. Are you a Muslim, or do you consider yourself highly knowledgable about Islam (or know an active user who meets that criteria)? I had a question (unrelated to your edits, AFAIK) about Islam, something I know a bit about, but am nothing like an expert. I won't take offense if you don't want to answer this post. Cheers. IronDuke 00:24, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would the word "Jihadist" be considered offensive? In all contexts, or only in some? Eg, as applied to a violent organization run by people who call themselves Muslims. Thanks. IronDuke 00:31, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was afraid you'd ask ;). There's a tussle on Osama bin Laden about whether and how to discuss the word "terrorist" as it relates to him and Al Qaeda (NB: I am officially not canvassing you to come to the article or to agree with me.) . I believe that calling AQ a terrorist organization as opposed to a jihadist organization is less offensive to Muslims. But I can't be sure. As I see it, jihad (not necessarily violent) is a holy obligation for Muslims. Many (most?) of them would surely be less than pleased to see it attached to an international pariah. At least, I think so. Thanks again. IronDuke 00:42, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah... didn't think you'd be wild about the context. FWIW, whatever one may think of the word, if reliable sources are virtually unanimous that, say, "User:IronDuke is a Martian," then for WP purposes, that's what I am. IronDuke 00:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Humus... One of the weirder I-P tussles, IMO. That said, I'm a little uneasy with using Palestine when one means Palestinian territories. What, after all, is Palestine? Gaza? The West Bank? East Jerusalem? Transjordan? Tel Aviv? I'd be very surprised if a place called Palestine wasn't created out of some part of the above, but it hasn't happened yet. IronDuke 01:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. IronDuke 01:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

what is palestine good question depends a good deal to your point of view Palestinian land loss map FAQ on the 1967 war systematic colonization of Palestine Kasaalan (talk) 20:04, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 5 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kafr Lam, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 09:18, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there; please let me know your critical thoughts: User:Tony1/AdminWatch#Specific_policy_requirements. Tony (talk) 16:56, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tiamut, thanks for your note! Of course I'll take a look at the dispute there and tell you what I think. At the moment I know nothing at all about it. It may take a while to digest and I might not comment til later tonight. I genuinely hope you don't lose heart over this or any other dispute. You're pretty invaluable here, as someone who actually knows a great deal about Palestinian history and culture. Not to mention your grace and charm and wit and collaborative spirit. Editors like me are of comparatively limited value, in that all I'm doing on these I/P pages is kicking stiletto heels at intellectual dishonesty when it's shoved into articles in giant plaster chunks. I'm always bemused when I'm described as "pro-Palestinian," because I have virtually no Palestinian orientation whatsoever; I'm as Western, American, and even Israeli in my intellectual and educational background as can be, and my politics are dead-boring centrist. I just happen to have no patience for word games and Orwellian nonsense, and that's enough to make you "pro-Palestinian" on Wikipedia. Wikipedia needs more genuinely pro-Palestinian editors, in the sense of editors with the knowledge, experience, and passion to improve and expand the encyclopedia in that area.

So for G-d's sake don't leave! Now let me look at this here hummus.--G-Dett (talk) 22:06, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You did answer it, thanks very much for making inquiries. I am sorry you are feeling besieged by WP; it is, I think a common feeling. I'll be honest: I'm torn, in that I feel as though I disagree with you rather often. And yet... well, I have a lot of theories about I-P topics here, and what should be done in terms of editing them, but I'll not bore you with them unprodded. That said, I know you asked me not to come by Hummus, at least as far as your own edits were concerned. But would you be mad if I reverted all of G-Dett's contributions to that page? I know she kind of counts on me to act as a corrective, but is embarrassed to ask me for help... (Seriously, I do appreciate your civil and thoughtful response. Wish that happened more on both sides of the aisle.) IronDuke 05:52, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The November 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:38, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marhaba Tiamut! Whenever you have free time (I know you've been quite busy lately), could you copyedit and write up a decent lead for al-Birwa and az-Zeeb. I've been expanding al-Birwa on and off for weeks, and recently az-Zeeb. Your help will be very much appreciated as always. --Al Ameer son (talk) 23:03, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tiamut, sorry for the delay. I've posted my thoughts on the Hummus talk page.--G-Dett (talk) 18:58, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I completely understand your frustration, and would no doubt share it had I spent more time on that page. I think what is most maddening is this idea that the encyclopedia shouldn't reflect Palestine as a cultural entity. That those who want it to are trying to "score points" or push a POV, while those who want to expunge any reference to Palestine as a cultural entity – sources and established usage be damned – are merely safeguarding NPOV. Ridiculous. It is entirely appropriate – both per common sense and per the sources – to talk about the poetry of Palestine, the food of Palestine, etc. When talking about cultural forms like these, you use naming terms that compass both past and present, and when you substitute in political-administrative terms like "the occupied territories" or whatever, on the grounds that these are the accepted terms for present-day political entities, you introduce an inappropriate context. "The poetry of the occupied territories" for a literary scholar would indicate literature produced, distributed, and consumed under the conditions of occupation, something narrower than and quite distinct from what "the poetry of Palestine" indicates. Same deal for food or any other cultural subject. The situation with "Samaria" right now is very different, because those fighting for its inclusion are trying to use it precisely in those political contexts where its use is most fiercely contested.

Basque country seems to me an appropriate comparison. There are political contexts – both French and Spanish – in which it would be inappropriate to refer to "the Basque country" as an entity in Wikipedia's neutral voice. But if we're talking about baby eels sauteed in garlic, it is absolutely appropriate to say this dish "features prominently in the cuisine of the Basque country," and the fact that said region is not actually a state or "country" would be irrelevant.

Anyway I am hopeful about the compromise. But I also hope some sort of clear precedent is set regarding terms like these, and the contexts they're appropriately used in.--G-Dett (talk) 01:07, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is always a pleasure to help..In what ever way I am able...Ashley kennedy3 (talk) 15:59, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've put an ANI against NoCal100. I know that you have rubbed into him/her so if you have anything to add or take away from it please do..Ashley kennedy3 (talk) 18:38, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...I too would prefer to get on with improving wiki. I also believe senseless arbitration and wiki lawyering is wasting time, unfortunately NoCal100 is butting in on subjects he knows nothing about merely to insert POV. So I am forced to confront him...Hopefully he/she will disappear back to whichever sock draw he/she came from, but I won't hold my breath for that...Ashley kennedy3 (talk) 19:39, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Tiamut, thank you for what you said. You're right, I shouldn't quit because of that. It is true I'm very frustrated because of those two liars (Bachmann and his friend), but the main reason I'm taking a long break is actually because I'm a medical intern and I have a series of horrendous examinations and ordeals coming up before I settle in a residency post, so reducing the waste time is actually a good idea for me. I might come back later, and I hope to see you again then. Best wishes and good luck. HD86 (talk) 01:47, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to say happy Eid and holidays HD86 (talk) 01:53, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the edit discussions gone out of control totally I took immense time on regathering the information and providing reasons for the eligibility of the links yet they refuse the give clear answers at all is there any way we can make progress at the page I also might be wrong yet if I am I cannot understand why can we call some judges or editors for the case I tried to settle but they are not advancing on my approach we most likely talking in different languages they even dont accept human rights watch report on the issue and dont provide any clear reason

Kasaalan (talk) 07:30, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 12 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jacob's Well, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Backslash Forwardslash 12:01, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Dear, dear Tiamut (sorry, I don't know - yet - how to write that in Arabic), you have absolutely nothing to apologise for. I too was tempted to modify my "vote", as I like to see a responsive editor. I also like to see substantial article-building experience in a candidate. I felt it best to wait a while in order to consider the right response. Also, there were other factors in my illness, but the stress certainly didn't help. I am not in the slightest little bit offended by your changing your vote.

Oh, and I was going to thank you anyway for your support there. When one is under attack such support makes a huge difference, and I appreciate it enormously.

You're doing good work at Rachel Corrie - it will be interesting to see what happens when/if you get into more contentious areas there. I agree with you about the "recentism" on the kidnapping attempt. Ironically, that section is still largely as I wrote it! I had noticed an ongoing edit-war over it, so I just read ALL the sources, and re-wrote it in my own words; the result was accepted by everybody, with only a few small modifications. I wish more editors would take the trouble to actually read the sources in full before summarising/paraphrasing/quoting them - it would save a lot of time in the long run. I think the whole article needs re-arranging for clarity (probably in chronological order) and great chunks of it need to be rewritten. Good luck, you'll need it there!

تحياتي وحـبـي --NSH001 (talk) 16:02, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS. A wee hint: when adding a new section to the bottom of a talk page, it's best to do so by using the "new section" tab at the top of the talk page. (It may appear either as a "+" or as "new section", you can change its appearance in your user preferences settings.) That way the correct section name will appear in your user contributions and article history listings. Also means you are immune from "edit conflict"s if someone else is editing the same page at the same time.

I was very disappointed when I saw it was you who added Gelber as a reference for this.
From my point of view, there is only one crime possible on wikipedia : cheating with the sources.
Ceedjee (talk) 20:30, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You used Gelber (2006) p.78 to source : "[this event] was aimed at sowing terror among the Arab population to drive them out of the city".

Of course, I have also removed the other "sources".

If you have ones, please refer to the talk:page of the "article" where I reminded (to newbees) how to deal such issues. Ceedjee (talk) 21:19, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...for the note! you know, I´m regularly wikistalking you, so I will add inf. when I find it! (...and have time..) Just now there is a lot to "clean up"... But I´m always very glad to see when we can get an article with picture(s), like Al-Khalisa, Majdal Yaba, or Yazur.... a picture really makes a difference! ..I will probably be around for the next few days, but then I might "disappear" for 2-4 weeks from the new year..("Disappear" = "I will be away from my books"..) ...Anyway, Take care, keep up the good work! Huldra (talk) 17:34, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• WHAW!! I´m really incredibly impressed with what you managed to do with Bethany (Biblical village) ..and al-Eizariya in such a short time! I just did the very basic minimum, ..like moving Church of Saint Lazarus, Israel away from Israel..... ;-P ..and I´ve done my bit over at commons, so that al-Eizariya now has its own common-cat.(Only 5-6 Paletinian villages have that so far, but a year ago it was zero, so it´s improving!)
• And I hope you have a great trip to Bethlehem! As Al Ameer son hinted: Jacir Palace doesn´t have any pictures ;-) Also, if you have time/opportunity: Palestinian Heritage Center, established by Maha Saca apparently has a nice collection of old Palestinian dresses. Many of those at the Chicago exhibition were from that collection...possibly the Beit Jibrin-dress, too. Anyway, if there is *any* possibility to photograph costumes, especially from the 1948-villages, it would be fantastic. It made such a difference to the Beit Jibrin article to get that picture of the dress! ..I am especially looking for a Beit Dajan -dress, --I know they were fantastic, and I believe the Palestinian Heritage Center have some examples. (Beit Dajan has a long and facinating history, lots of literature about the place, (Baldensperger is now on the net) If we had a picture or two we should definitely go for GA-status!)
• However, if you check the "common-cat." for Palestinian clothing, you will see that it has greatly increased this last year. So all the bigger towns are quite well covered. What we need is material from the small villages.
• Oh, and Al Ameer son would surely *love* a picture for Lajjun...
• Anyway, I might be coming to the West Bank for a week or two next spring. Nothing is decided yet, but it is a definite possibility. However, Israel "proper" will not be on the agenda. But I had hoped to get to Al-Bireh, to see (and photograph!) the INASH center...if it is still open!
• Anyway, take care, and have a nice (and peaceful!) Christmas...(though I will see you around the next few days, too, I hope! Cheers, Huldra (talk) 21:44, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		This is for your tremendous expansion of Imwas, not to mention starting the articles of Meiron and Jacob's Well with richly sourced information. I've always come to you when an article needs a great lead or a quality copyedit. This barnstar of quality, effort, and dedication could have no more of a fit owner. Congratulations and keep up the good work! Al Ameer son (talk) 07:57, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Tiamut

I am listening now to a wonderful BBC radio programme on music in Nazareth. You can listen to it for the next week only, at the World Routes website. RolandR (talk) 13:15, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May I join Roland in the spirit of his note, and direct you also to
Wednesday 17 December 2008 Tarab available at Late Night Live ABC, Australia Nishidani (talk) 14:29, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On your trip to Bethlehem:-

1. Baituna al-Talhami Museum
2. Badd Giacaman Museum
3. Palestinian Heritage Center

• Star Street
• Bethlehem University
• Aida (camp)

1. And a street map with the positions of the first three accurately marked...if you can't get the photos...I will not matter, have a very good Christmas...Ashley kennedy3 (talk) 17:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Take care and many thanks...And may all of the Gods take care of all of their charges...Ashley kennedy3 (talk) 17:24, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's what we topographical surveyors do. We tend to like coordinates. We see the world in geocoords...Thanks for the recognition...Ashley kennedy3 (talk) 12:56, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a contributor to the Bayt Naqquba article you may be interested in the discussion at Talk:Bayt Naqquba. I am surprised that the editor who posted the proposal has been so uncivil as not to have notified you..Ashley kennedy3 (talk) 23:32, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lajjun passed its review and has been listed as a good article. By the way, I wanted to remind you that Hebron glass has still not been nominated for GA, and if it is nominated, it'll likely pass like Nabulsi soap. You or Huldra should really go for it. Cheers! --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:54, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have included a topic for discussion with the section Mergers started by Chesdovi as I feel it is within the scope of the topic. Please see and add any comments you feel applicable...Ashley kennedy3 (talk) 14:22, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

.Nishidani (talk) 14:44, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tiamut. Thanks for the help with the article. I'm not sure what you're trying to do here. Are you saying that there are conflicting accounts about who was warned? Are you saying that some sources say he was warned and some sources are saying that his family was warned? --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 14:49, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying. The ambiguities are really saying the same thing. How exactly would it be possible that his family was warned but he wasn't? You think they told all 11 kids and all 4 wives that we are bombing but he did not know? They apparently called the house prior to the bombing and told whoever answered the phone (or they asked for Rayan and told him) about the impending bombing. Whether he told his family members about the impending bombing is something that we will probably never know, but there really isn't any sort scenario in which his family knew about the bombing while he didn't. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 15:07, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also can we come to some sort of agreement about prefacing sentences with the source supporting the text. Surely, you admit that the article would look silly if each sentence is prefaced with its source. It lacks prose and is not a MOS that is used at WP. I admit that the preface is required for certain occasions, where a POV news source like Al-Jazeera or Arutz Sheva is making a claim unsupported by other sources. But if it's a mainstream source like the International Herald Tribune, a preface is not needed. That being said, a Hamas spokesperson said as well that he was warned and it's not something that there are disagreement over. It's all over the RS's so that doesn't need to be prefaced either. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 14:59, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea. This discussion should take place at the talkpage. However, I have to leave now to talk care of my silly real life, so I'll try to get to it later. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 15:13, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing: I actually read every article in the footnotes. Sometimes the newspaper themselves update the articles, change the information, and the source no longer supports the text. For example, at one point, the Los Angeles Times said that he had 17 children. I put that fact into the article, and an hour later their updated version had 12 children. So I agree that we must go over all the sources until the dust settles, so to speak. At the same time, however, although some articles might seem like they are contradicting each other, they really are basically saying the same thing with different ambiguities. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 15:23, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Today hundreds of thousands of people around the world are going to be demonstrating against the horrors, atrocities and war crimes in Gaza. In a few minutes time I'll be getting the train into central London to join them. Best wishes my friend, and sorry for the rushed message. --NSH001 (talk) 11:06, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• You are definitely not alone, dear Tiamut, but I must admit I am a bit at loss for words. The horrors make me almost numb. As you may know, two Norwegian doctors came to the Shifa hospital in Gaza around NewYear´s eve, they have been reporting almost non-stop to the Scandinavian media ever since. Every day: a new horror. One effect is that there have been protests everywhere, I´m not bothering to update International reaction to the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict, as there are dozens of places where there have been demonstrations. Even the conservative Lord Mayor of Oslo have suggested to move the Israeli embassy away from it´s prime down-town location (it´s up-scale neighbourhood is becoming too used to tear-gas...: not good for property-prices!) But if the Israeli embassy want to move to a place *without* protests, I´m afraid they will have to move to Bear Island ..or perhaps Jan Mayen. ..tonight the socalled "Friends of Israel" held a demonstration (all 300-500 of them).. that sparked off the worst riots in Norway for more that 25 years.
• The Swedish and Norwegian experts in human rights interviewed here agree on two things: Israel is "most certainly" committing war-crimes, and, secondly: they can do so with impunity. Nobody will be punished. And the Israelis know it. (Thanks to the US..)
• But things *are* changing...though slowly. 25-30 years ago it was absolutely impossible to say anything critical about Israel. I wonder how it will be 25-30 years from now? My own thoughts: I don´t think we will have peace in 25-30 years. Sorry.
• Finally, thanks for the pictures! Especially of the Jacir Palace. I don´t know if you are familiar with her, but one great-granddaughter of the builder of the palace is Emily Jacir. Now, she is a truly great artist; I´m following her work with great interest. Take a look at her "refugee tent" (embroidered with the names of all the 1948-villages)[8] or this (one of my favorites) "untitled"...books by or about Palestinians...and no shelf [9]. That installation really "hit" me!
• Take care, Tiamut, and may your Sumud keep you going, cheers, Huldra (talk) 02:29, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On January 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nizar Rayan, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 05:48, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The December 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 05:05, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back Tiamut. Sorry for not greeting you earlier, we've all been busy with the massacre being perpetrated against our nation lately. It's still happening and no one will budge or do anything to stop it (it especially hurts when the Arab governments won't do nothing, it's like those bastards are in on it!) Anyhow, please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Palestine#Gaza Devotion period. We can't do much, but we must show our solidarity in any way we can within the limits of Wiki rules. --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:47, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but the deleted comments were in clear violation of WP:SOAP. It is acceptable to remove inappropriate discussion from talk pages and I have done so. I am not trying to encourage or discourage anyone's personal views, but comments which are not directly related to improving the article are not allowed. Please do not feel this is a personal attack or a statement of any viewpoint. Some guy (talk) 00:26, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I'm sorry, but the rules are on my side in this instance. Per Wikipedia:Talk#Editing comments, it is appropriate to directly remove such comments. I have tried not to damage the integrity of the discussions while removing inappropriate soap-box discussion. If you continue to restore the deleted material I will be forced to summon an admin for assistance. Please again understand this is simply to try to and keep the talk page from being bloated with inappropriate discussion which is not regarding improving the article, and nothing personal against anyone or anyone's views. Some guy (talk) 00:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just realized I did not post the link to the guideline page about unacceptable talk page behavior and I have fixed this. I have created a notice at the administrator noticeboard regarding this incident because I feel the inappropriate text should be deleted. You can contribute to the discussion here. Some guy (talk) 00:58, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just wanted to say that the quote you have at the top of the talk is the single best quote I have ever seen to try to make people recognize the humanity in the Palestinian people and their rights as basic human beings. Out here in the states everybody, on all sides of the political 'spectrum', make the same tired comparison about what would the US do if Cuba were to send some 5 missiles at Florida; nobody ever asks, publicly at least, what would we do if we were forced to live under a brutal occupation, one that denies basic fundamental human rights, one that denies our mere existence as a people and nation. Would we not resist, would we not fight for our rights? And should we be held in condemnation for that resistance? If people actually reflected on those words instead of allowing the entire country to be hijacked by the AIPAC crowd, maybe the situation would be different. Maybe I wouldn't have to hear Joe Biden and Sarah Palin argue about who loves Israel more during their one debate. Maybe Egypt wouldn't be so scared of losing the billion dollars they get to continue to allow such a situation to stand. A little long winded, but I sincerely wish you the best. Nableezy (talk) 05:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]