Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:22, 5 June 2006

• Archive of Previous Username 23 October 2005- 31 January 2006
• Archive 1 6 November 2005- 16 March 2006
• Archive 2 18 March 2006- 15 April 2006
• Archive 3 15 April 2006- 3 May 2006
• Archive 4 3 May 2006- 29 May 2006
• Archive 5 29 May 2006- 3 June 2006

3RR?

I have removed the autoblock, sometimes the autoblocker plays up and kicks straight back in so post the unblock template again if you get more problems. --pgk 19:20, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Still Blocked.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 19:24, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok the autoblock recurred, I've tried removing it again. If this doesn't work I can try unblocking your IP as that sometimes clears it, but you'll need to let me know what that is... --pgk 19:28, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Still not working! IP address is 67.169.170.140. Doesn't it seem kinda ridiculous if this always happens like this?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 19:33, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, I've tried unblockling that as well. This doesn't always happen but sometimes does and is pretty frustrating for me as well as you. --pgk 19:37, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Try now. I think I got the autoblock undone. --InShaneee 19:37, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Nope- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 19:40, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

OK I've blocked and then unblocked the IP, see if that helps. --pgk 19:43, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Still no.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 19:44, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

And again --pgk 19:47, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Glad it finally worked, I can understand your anger, but mistakes happen and the blocking admin did try to put it right pretty quickly. It just wasn't helped by the way the autoblocker malfunctions sometimes. --pgk 19:51, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I know. That's why I unblocked you about 30 seconds later when I caught that. --InShaneee 19:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I can't believe Moshe was blocked on the basis of a transparently bogus report. The one who should be blocked is the one who filed it.

Meanwhile, Anonymous editor has been reported for a real violation, he's undeniably lied in his defense, and attacked other editors (well me) as well. No block yet...Timothy Usher 20:06, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: huh

"Maybe if you would have just been honest and said that you were removing the content because you were afraid about looking bad"

Oh, is that why you quickly archived my comments just over three hours after I made them? Look, seriously, stop harassing me. I asked you to stop posting on my talk page. I have a feeling you keep posting because you don't like people saying "no" to you. Now stop. Homey 22:14, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Give me a break. Do you see those strange blue things on the top of my talk page? those are called links, but wait where how come those same things aren't on your talk page?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 01:01, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

To Moshe

"And how many times have you posted on my talk page the last week?"

How many times have you asked me not to? None.

How many times have I asked you not to post on mine? Homey 01:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

And I don't care if you do, but if you demand someone not talk to you anymore, do you continue arguing with them?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 11:13, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

POV-pushing in ostensibly neutral scientific articles

Don't know if you've noticed, but User:Thameen has created dozens of articles talking about an "Israel Palestine." I moved one to Biodiversity in Israel (compare Biodiversity in Israel Palestine), but there are apparently dozens more judging by the links on that page; this appears to be a job for a bot, which is beyond my ken. Cheers. -- FRCP11 08:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Ban

Moshe, I've banned you for 24 hours for vandalising Talk:Jewish Defense League. You did so with this edit ie removing another user's comments from the Talk page in violation of policy. Homey 17:26, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I suppose it is completly unreasonable to suggest you should not have re-inserted the comment in the first place, or that it is somewhat strange to block someone when you are a primary party to the conflict.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 17:34, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Homey has clearly violated the blocking policy, as he's a party to the conflict on the page, and has been engaged in an ongoing dispute with Moshe related to Homey's removal of Moshe's comments, which he deems trolling, from his talk page. The "other user" to which Homey refers is, in fact, himself. Without taking a position on either dispute, it's not reasonable to suppose that these weren't primary motivations in Homey's decision to block.Timothy Usher 17:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I would have preferred a warning be issued before a block here, but I don't disagree that Moshe's removal of talk page comments is very innapropriate. --InShaneee 17:59, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

The comment I removed was my own that I deleted right after I wrote it when I realized it was erroneus. Homey went through the history to copied it down so that he could have something to refute.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 18:02, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I think that's perfectly reasonable. Once you post on a talk page, people are going to want to respond. If you remove the comment, suddenly the discussion doesn't make any sense. Hence why it's not something that should be done. --InShaneee 18:03, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Because I assume good faith. I'm willing to bet that he simply saw your comment and was unable to respond before you removed it. --InShaneee 18:08, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree Moshe's edit should not have been made, but am disturbed, distressed and offended by User:Homeontherange's violation of Misplaced Pages's blocking policy:

"Use of blocks to gain an advantage in a content dispute is strictly prohibited. That is, sysops must not block editors with whom they are currently engaged in a content dispute."

The blocking admin either doesn't know it, or doesn't care. Either way, we have a problem.Timothy Usher 18:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Timothy, no advantage was gained by me in a content dispute as I did not edit Jewish Defence League away from Moshe's version after I blocked him, nor did I add any comment to the Talk page - I only restored it to the way it was prior to his violation - thus I did not violate policy. Had I edited JDL to my preferred version and then blocked Moshe you'd have a point but that did not occur. Moshe, conversely, did violate our vandalism policy by removing someone else's comments from a an article's talk page. Homey 19:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

You were involved in disputes on two fronts as to the content of talk pages, including your own. Perhaps you're right that this doesn't count as a "content dispute", but the point and spirit of the provision is obvious - you shouldn't be the one blocking him, there are many other admins out there, and you can't credibly claim to be impartial - indeed, who would expect you to be?

You should have presented the case to another admin as would any other editor, if not merely warn him, again as would any other editor. Don't mix adminship with your personal disputes. It's bad, and you shouldn't do it. That's all I'm saying.Timothy Usher 19:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Timothy, I've tempbanned people on sight whenever I've seen them remove talk page comment. This is the first time I've seen it done to *me*, that's the only difference. But, ok then. *You* just said "I agree Moshe's edit should not have been made" He has refused to admit he made a mistake. What are you going to do? Are you going to tempban him as a result or are you going to let your personal relationship with him interfere with disciplining him for violating policy? Homey 19:18, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Moshe should agree not to alter other editors' comments. It's unacceptable. The fact that Homey removes posts from his talk page is obnoxious, but is allowed by current understanding of policy, just as are Moshe's posts thereto. Altering other editors' comments on talk pages is not.

I'd like to hear from Moshe that he understands this, and will abide by it.Timothy Usher 19:24, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I understand that it is wrong to alter other peoples comments. But basically homey did the same thing by reinserting a small passage that I removed from my own comment. The fact that I removed it before Homey's next post means he actually dug through the history just so he could have something to refute from my argument. He should not have done this, and should have accepted it when I once again removed what I had written. The fact that he has attempted to penalize me show a gross disregard of civility and administrative privledge.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 19:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

You may think it aggravating for him to go through the history and repost something you'd withdrawn, but that's a completely legitimate use of talk space. Had he altered your posts, as you did his - your comment was at this point part of his post, not yours - it'd be a different story.

Altering other editors' posts is unacceptable. It's that simple. Don't do it.Timothy Usher 19:39, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I cannot accept that.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 19:43, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually Moshe, what happened (and the history will verify this) is I wrote a response to your comment, posted it, and then found that the actual comment I was replying to had disappeared meaning my comment made no sense. So I then went into the history, found your comment, and added an addition to *my* comment explaining that you had removed the quoted material from your comment. I did not, actually, "reinsert" your deleted sentence into your comment. I simply quoted it in my comments.

Now, are you going to admit what you did was wrong and promise not to do it again or are you going to put Timothy in the uncomfortable position of having to ban you for directly disregarding his warning and insisting you didn't violate policy?Homey 19:47, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I know that I do not have anything to take responsibility for. You specifically altered my comment and then tried to get around it by saying "Moshe said".- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 19:51, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Moshe, it's policy, and you must follow it. It doesn't matter if you accept it.

If you're faced with such a situation in the future, I recommend that you post your own comment to the effect that you'd retracted your statement, and that there is thus no point for other editors to drag it up. This accomplishes the same thing without altering other editors' posts, and without getting you blocked.Timothy Usher 19:57, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

"You specifically altered my comment" Where did I alter your comment? Show me the diff? Sorry Moshe, I never altered your comment, I replied to a version of your comment and you changed your comment in the meantime. I did not "alter" your comment, I copied and quoted a part of your comment that your removed once you realised that what you had written was wrong. I then added an explanation that the quotation had originally appeared in your comment and that you had removed it. You then altered *my* post by removing the quotation and explanation.Homey 20:05, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Moshe, you seem to have a problem admitting when you're wrong. You preferred to vandalise the page and remove part of my comment rather than allow people to know that you had said something that was patently false, you then refuse to admit that doing that was a violation of policy. Moshe, are you ever wrong? Can you ever admit a mistake?Homey 20:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

This is comical. I guess I was wrong that I mentioned that you blanked your talk page. I guess I was wrong to say anything about you blocking me when you were the other party to the conflict. I guess I was wrong in any other case where I disagreed with you. Is that what you are saying?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 20:15, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey Homey, you might want to lay off a bit. The best way to make someone hate you is to try and get them to admit their wrong when they don't want to. --Ben Houston 20:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid Moshe already hates me and that's not going to change now.

Anyway Moshe you were wrong to keep posting on my personal talk page after I'd asked you half a dozen times or so to stop and you were wrong about policy in regards to personal talk pages but what we're talking about here is policy regarding article talk pages. If you don't accept Tim's warning and admit you were wrong the admins will have no choice but to restore the tempban against you. It's your choice. Homey 20:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I am not going to admit I am wrong because I know I am not. Lay off of it already.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 20:26, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok Moshe, I'll give you a way to get off the hook while saving face. I"ve noticed you've not reverted Talk:Jewish Defense League since having the tempban lifted and have not altered the comments on there. Are you going to leave it that way? If you really think you're right then you would have gone and reverted the talk page. As you haven't done that I think we can assume you know that you were wrong even if you're not mature enough to admit it. So are you going to leave Talk:Jewish Defense League alone or are you going to insist you're right and go and revert it?Homey 20:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

That does not make any sense. You keep trying to figure out a way to get me to admit I am wrong, I do not know why you are eccentric enough to go to these creative lengths but I am not going to inflame a situation that has already gone on too long. So please stop baiting me it is getting tiresome.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 20:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Homey, blocking someone with whom you are in a content dispute is an outrageous violation of administrative rights, and this is the second time in a week you have done it. Rather than compounding your error by continuing to attempt to indimidate Moshe with your administrative status, I would suggest backing off, and re-evaluating your actions. Jayjg 20:36, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

"That does not make any sense" It makes perfect sense. If you thought you were right you'd go straight back to Talk:Jewish Defense League and do what you did before. You haven't done so. Why is that?Homey 20:40, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Please see the comment above, Homey. Jayjg 20:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

3RR

So are you, in reference to both articles. Homey 18:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Terrorism Category

Well, there are 3 possibilities:

1) Delete the terrorism category.

2) Redefine the category so that it may only be applied to groups that refer to themselves as terrorists. (Are there any such groups?)

3) Apply the category to organizations that fit the criteria (having been described as terrorist in notable sources).

--Denis Diderot 19:18, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The main problem with the "terrorism" category is that the definition is too vague and inclusive. Either it would have to be redefined more narrowly or deleted and replaced with better defined subcategories.

(I tend to think that the whole Misplaced Pages system of categories is a mess. It's completely inconsistent and unsystematic. Therefore rather pointless and confusing.)

:--Denis Diderot

I was thinking of adding a Category:Organizations accused of terrorism and a Category:Terrorist organizations. Also a Category:Anti-terrorism organizations is needed. --Ben Houston 23:22, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

ADL on Jewish Defense League

Here is what the ADL says about them . Also see the links on the right hand side. --Ben Houston 01:25, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I think that you will always be able to find a few people that do not believe that the JDL is a racist and violent organization -- but you can also find people that will say this about Hamas or various white supremacist organizations. My feeling is that people have to rightly pick which sources are more reliable. In this case the FBI and the ADL and the SPLC all agree. While you can point to the opinion of Kinky Friedman he is far from mainstream and he has no expertise in this area. --Ben Houston 19:57, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

BTW Moshe Hamas *is* listed in the Terrorism category. Homey 20:11, 5 June 2006 (UTC)