| Revision as of 15:21, 3 September 2006 editIan Pitchford (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers30,648 edits Answered← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:43, 3 September 2006 edit undoFormer user 2 (talk | contribs)7,183 edits restoring - removing warnings from user Talk pages is vandalismNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| == Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue IV - June 2006 == | |||
| The ''']''' 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. ] 05:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Palestine (Country) == | |||
| Hey Ian, I notice you've put this up for deletion. You also need to add it to the AfD page; ] explains how that is done. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 05:12, 2 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Israeli apartheid == | |||
| I see you've reverted one of Bill Levinson's two additions. You might want to look at the other - since you did a rollback you reverted only to my addition of a commented out sentence saying this is OR. ] 19:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Sorry == | |||
| Hey, Ian. I`m verry sorry for vandalizing Berit Kjos` article. I only did that to relieve stress because she thinks I`m some sort of occult lover just because I like Pokemon. I won`t ever do it again. I promise. --] 7:00. 4 July, 2006 | |||
| == Request for == | |||
| The move/revert war issue for ] has been referred to arbitration. See ] /] 17:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| {{RFM-Request|]|Apartheid (disambiguation)}} /] 17:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Thank You == | |||
| Dear Ian, | |||
| Greetings from India. | |||
| Thanks for your edit in the ] article. | |||
| --] 19:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Since you have been involved in the dispute, you may be interested to know there is now a survey about the name change: | |||
| --] 23:06, 9 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == using popups == | |||
| popups is an anati vandalsim tool. Please avoid using it for edits. | |||
| In any case you must provide and edit summary for <u>each of your edits</u> and remember to avoid edit wars. | |||
| Thanks, | |||
| ] 04:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue V - July 2006 == | |||
| The ''']''' 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. | |||
| <small>This is an automated delivery by ].</small> | |||
| == ] Coordinator Elections! == | |||
| The ] selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please ] by August 11! | |||
| <small>This is an automated delivery by ] - 19:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)</small> | |||
| == use talk == | |||
| You have sonme fringe minority view on the reason for the 6 day war ? | |||
| Fine. Discuss it on talk and convince a consensus. Until you do the known facts will remain in the text of the article. ] 12:23, 30 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Being subject to some considerable buffing and POV pushing - can you have a look please? ] 19:26, 2 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| Good work! ] 02:35, 3 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Hey, I was about to say the same thing but I see that someone got there first. Appreciate your re-adding the Max Wallace material after it was removed. If you look at the Talk page you can see that the Wallace book has been described as "crap" by one editor, and was deleted on what struck me as inadequate grounds. I hope that you keep an eye on the page. --] 13:07, 3 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Why did you revert this page to a much older version, without any explanation given? --] 17:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == if you're going to terrorise my page say in discussion first what bothers you == | |||
| the page was good as it was. ] 10:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == You have been warned == | |||
| Not to edit war. Conduct your disgareement in talk. Don't vandelize the page. ] 07:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Discussion moved to talk page of relevant article. You are warned not to edit war == | |||
| Please discuss like any other editor. you are not privilged. ] 07:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == use of popu tool == | |||
| Ian, | |||
| I have warned you before that the popup tool is anti-vandalism tool. | |||
| Your continued use of it in your endless POV reverts cast a shadow on your ability to use talk and comunicate with your fellow editors. Please use talk. ] 11:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == done with false accuastions and starting with wikistlaking ? == | |||
| ???? ] 15:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Possibly unfree Image:Afif-Safieh.jpg == | |||
| <div style="padding:5px; background-color:#E1F1DE;"> An image that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ] because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its ] for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -]] 18:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)<!-- Template:Idw-pui --></div> | |||
| == Terminology == | |||
| Ian, frankly I hate terms like "massacre", "terrorism", etc. But given the facts, it is pure propaganda to say that one side commits "massacres" while the other merely "riots", one engages in "apartheid" while the other merely "resists", one lives in "settlements" while the other in "villages", etc. Sorry to say, you are rapidly losing my respect lately. ←] <sup>]</sup> 21:57, 9 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Passover riots/massacre == | |||
| Ian, you can't move things that way; now you've lost all the history for the original page. You have to do a proper move, not just a copy-paste-redirect. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 22:46, 10 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Please stop damaging articles concerning Katz's work == | |||
| Thank you. | |||
| Your requested google scholar cites his works numerous times. ] 08:50, 12 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Military history WikiProject coordinator election - vote phase! == | |||
| The ] election has begun. We will select seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of eleven candidates. Please ] by August 26! | |||
| <small>This is an automated delivery by ] - 12:06, 12 August 2006 (UTC)</small> | |||
| ==using popups on faisal weizman article== | |||
| popups is an anti vandalsim tool. Please avoid using it for edits. | |||
| In any case you must provide and edit summary for each of your edits and remember to avoid edit wars. | |||
| Thanks, ] 20:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Un SC 242 == | |||
| There is an active discussion taking place on this issue. Please let me know why you re-inserted the excised quote without comment. Thanks.] 15:13, 22 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Ambiguity is not the point. "Secure and Recognized Boundaries" is not a lesser element than "Acquisition by Force", and it is POV to focus on either one without the other. I removed the quote not because I disagree with it, but because it doesn't belong in that section of the article. I intend to remove the quote again, but will be happy (desirous, really) to see it placed in a more appropriate place in the article. ] 15:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Your contention that "Inadmissibility is a higher principle" is POV. If you can support that theory in the context of UN SC 242 you should make such edits with appropriate citations. I dispute that either one of the two elements of that clause has priority over the other.] 15:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| The pursuit of a just peace and the rights of States to live within secure boundaries are principles with no less importance in international law than the inadmissibility of acquisition of territory by force. These principles of peace and security serve to prevent future wars. It is not an accident to have put those two principles together in the same sentence in UN SC 242. Attempts to disaggregate them and apply only one side of the equation actually contribute to the possibility of future conflict rather than towards its resolution. I dispute that their is anything ambiguous about the concept of "secure boundaries", although I don't see any mechanism for achieving such boundaries without a negotiated peace between the parties. This was as plain as day to the members of the Security Council when they voted on 242 and the transcripts bear this out. Again, if you feel strongly on this (as you appear to) please help me develop this issue in the body of the article so everybody will have access to the fruits of our labor. Please don't just add and/or remove material without helping to provide context and develop a deeper understanding of the issues involved. I appreciate that you think that "Inadmissibility" can stand alone as an unambiguous, inarguable point of principle, but there are many reasonable well-intentioned people who don't agree that this principle can, should, or was designed to be applied isolation of other equally relevant principles.] 15:52, 22 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| I have reconsidered your inclusion of the quote and now agree that it is relevant because the speaker actually explicitly drew the linkage himself; I admit that I did not originally focus on the manifest explicitness of this linkage. I will let Zero0000 know as well. I maintain my wider points to you about the inappropriateness of considering the "Inadmissibility" principle in isolation, and I believe the diplomatic history and actual transcripts of the Security Council provide compelling evidence to support my contention here. When I have time I will try to develop this aspect of the debate within the article itself and would welcome your participation.] 16:19, 22 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| Please take note of ]. —] 17:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Do not remove warnings from your Talk page== | |||
| Removing all discussion from your Talk page, including numerous warnings you have received from other users regarding violations of WP policy is considered vandalism. Do not do it. You may archive older discussions - '''but do not remove warnigns'''. ] 17:43, 3 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:43, 3 September 2006
Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue IV - June 2006
The June 2006 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. Kirill Lokshin 05:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Palestine (Country)
Hey Ian, I notice you've put this up for deletion. You also need to add it to the AfD page; Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion explains how that is done. Jayjg 05:12, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Israeli apartheid
I see you've reverted one of Bill Levinson's two additions. You might want to look at the other - since you did a rollback you reverted only to my addition of a commented out sentence saying this is OR. Homey 19:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Sorry
Hey, Ian. I`m verry sorry for vandalizing Berit Kjos` article. I only did that to relieve stress because she thinks I`m some sort of occult lover just because I like Pokemon. I won`t ever do it again. I promise. --209.214.200.71 7:00. 4 July, 2006
Request for
The move/revert war issue for Israeli Apartheid has been referred to arbitration. See Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration#Move and revert warring at Israeli Apartheid /SlaveCrixus 17:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 | This user page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. If you want to revive discussion regarding the subject, you might try contacting the user in question or seeking broader input via a forum such as the village pump. |
 | Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/OpenNote is deprecated. Please see User:MediationBot/Opened message instead. |
/SlaveCrixus 17:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank You
Dear Ian, Greetings from India. Thanks for your edit in the Marayoor article. --Cyril Thomas 19:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Battle_of_Deir_Yassin
Since you have been involved in the dispute, you may be interested to know there is now a survey about the name change: --Pan Gerwazy 23:06, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
using popups
popups is an anati vandalsim tool. Please avoid using it for edits.
In any case you must provide and edit summary for each of your edits and remember to avoid edit wars.
Thanks, Zeq 04:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue V - July 2006
The July 2006 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 is an automated delivery by grafikbot.
Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Military history Coordinator Elections!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 11!
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot - 19:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
use talk
You have sonme fringe minority view on the reason for the 6 day war ? Fine. Discuss it on talk and convince a consensus. Until you do the known facts will remain in the text of the article. Zeq 12:23, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Israel and the UN
Being subject to some considerable buffing and POV pushing - can you have a look please? 86.27.55.184 19:26, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Henry Ford
Good work! Rklawton 02:35, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
- Hey, I was about to say the same thing but I see that someone got there first. Appreciate your re-adding the Max Wallace material after it was removed. If you look at the Talk page you can see that the Wallace book has been described as "crap" by one editor, and was deleted on what struck me as inadequate grounds. I hope that you keep an eye on the page. --Mantanmoreland 13:07, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Neturei Karta
Why did you revert this page to a much older version, without any explanation given? --Daniel575 17:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
if you're going to terrorise my page say in discussion first what bothers you
the page was good as it was. Amoruso 10:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
You have been warned
Not to edit war. Conduct your disgareement in talk. Don't vandelize the page. Zeq 07:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Discussion moved to talk page of relevant article. You are warned not to edit war
Please discuss like any other editor. you are not privilged. Zeq 07:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
use of popu tool
Ian,
I have warned you before that the popup tool is anti-vandalism tool. Your continued use of it in your endless POV reverts cast a shadow on your ability to use talk and comunicate with your fellow editors. Please use talk. Zeq 11:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
done with false accuastions and starting with wikistlaking ?
???? Zeq 15:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Possibly unfree Image:Afif-Safieh.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Afif-Safieh.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -SCEhardT 18:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Terminology
Ian, frankly I hate terms like "massacre", "terrorism", etc. But given the facts, it is pure propaganda to say that one side commits "massacres" while the other merely "riots", one engages in "apartheid" while the other merely "resists", one lives in "settlements" while the other in "villages", etc. Sorry to say, you are rapidly losing my respect lately. ←Humus sapiens 21:57, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Passover riots/massacre
Ian, you can't move things that way; now you've lost all the history for the original page. You have to do a proper move, not just a copy-paste-redirect. Jayjg 22:46, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Please stop damaging articles concerning Katz's work
Thank you. Your requested google scholar cites his works numerous times. Amoruso 08:50, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject coordinator election - vote phase!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will select seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of eleven candidates. Please vote here by August 26!
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot - 12:06, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
using popups on faisal weizman article
popups is an anti vandalsim tool. Please avoid using it for edits.
In any case you must provide and edit summary for each of your edits and remember to avoid edit wars.
Thanks, Amoruso 20:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Un SC 242
There is an active discussion taking place on this issue. Please let me know why you re-inserted the excised quote without comment. Thanks.Dasondas 15:13, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Ambiguity is not the point. "Secure and Recognized Boundaries" is not a lesser element than "Acquisition by Force", and it is POV to focus on either one without the other. I removed the quote not because I disagree with it, but because it doesn't belong in that section of the article. I intend to remove the quote again, but will be happy (desirous, really) to see it placed in a more appropriate place in the article. Dasondas 15:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Your contention that "Inadmissibility is a higher principle" is POV. If you can support that theory in the context of UN SC 242 you should make such edits with appropriate citations. I dispute that either one of the two elements of that clause has priority over the other.Dasondas 15:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
The pursuit of a just peace and the rights of States to live within secure boundaries are principles with no less importance in international law than the inadmissibility of acquisition of territory by force. These principles of peace and security serve to prevent future wars. It is not an accident to have put those two principles together in the same sentence in UN SC 242. Attempts to disaggregate them and apply only one side of the equation actually contribute to the possibility of future conflict rather than towards its resolution. I dispute that their is anything ambiguous about the concept of "secure boundaries", although I don't see any mechanism for achieving such boundaries without a negotiated peace between the parties. This was as plain as day to the members of the Security Council when they voted on 242 and the transcripts bear this out. Again, if you feel strongly on this (as you appear to) please help me develop this issue in the body of the article so everybody will have access to the fruits of our labor. Please don't just add and/or remove material without helping to provide context and develop a deeper understanding of the issues involved. I appreciate that you think that "Inadmissibility" can stand alone as an unambiguous, inarguable point of principle, but there are many reasonable well-intentioned people who don't agree that this principle can, should, or was designed to be applied isolation of other equally relevant principles.Dasondas 15:52, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
I have reconsidered your inclusion of the quote and now agree that it is relevant because the speaker actually explicitly drew the linkage himself; I admit that I did not originally focus on the manifest explicitness of this linkage. I will let Zero0000 know as well. I maintain my wider points to you about the inappropriateness of considering the "Inadmissibility" principle in isolation, and I believe the diplomatic history and actual transcripts of the Security Council provide compelling evidence to support my contention here. When I have time I will try to develop this aspect of the debate within the article itself and would welcome your participation.Dasondas 16:19, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
1948 Arab-Israeli War
Please take note of WP:3RR. —Aiden 17:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Do not remove warnings from your Talk page
Removing all discussion from your Talk page, including numerous warnings you have received from other users regarding violations of WP policy is considered vandalism. Do not do it. You may archive older discussions - but do not remove warnigns. Isarig 17:43, 3 September 2006 (UTC)