| Revision as of 15:26, 27 October 2014 editSphilbrick (talk | contribs)Administrators178,672 edits →Clarification motion: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:56, 28 October 2014 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,304,377 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:PalestineRemembered/Archives/2009/March) (botNext edit → | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]. | ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]. | ||
| == I need your assistance/advice == | |||
| Hi, I reached your user page through browsing Palestinian related articles, I have some problems here at wiki and I am fully convinced that neutrality is only a myth, but to find that POV is so obvious at certain articles is not tolerable by me, I tried to eliminate the POV but with no use, maybe I have the wrong understanding, could you please assist me by answering the following questions, and advising on how best to act: | |||
| # This article: ] is (in my opinion) forking, and in violation with ], ], and ], I nominated it for deletion but it was not deleted, for me, it is somehow ok. But, please note the title of this article ], why attacks against Jewish are being identified as Antisemetic (at the title of the former article), while Hamas' attacks against spies are not identified as spies termination (at the title of the latter article), and why was the Jewish attacks linked to the last assault (at the title of the former article), while Hamas termination was not linked to the last assault (at the title of the latter article), isn't this double standards? Please advise me whether or not I have the wrong understanding, and if my understanding is correct, what can I do? | |||
| # The article ] contains a section ] which includes bunch of claims that this site is a holy site in Islam without using any proper reliable Islamic or theological sources, I mean how can anyone says that this site is holy for Islam, while Islam doesn't recognize this site as being holy, or without using theoglocial sources - actually non of the sources used are theological sources. I tried reporting this incident to ] and ]. Once again is my understanding wrong, and if not, what should I do? | |||
| Looking forward to hearing your advice. ] (]) 12:24, 2 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Ireland naming question == | |||
| You are receiving this message because you have previously posted at a Ireland naming related discussion. Per ], a procedure has been developed at ], and the project is now taking statements. <!-- yet to be put there --> Before creating or replying to a statement please consider the ], the ] and current ]. ] (]) 18:15, 5 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Artistic Tributes to ] Page Getting Deleted == | == Artistic Tributes to ] Page Getting Deleted == | ||
Revision as of 00:56, 28 October 2014
Archive1, Archive2, Archive3, Oct 2007, Nov 2007, Dec 2007, Feb 2008, Apr 2008, May 2008, Jun 2008, Jul 2008, Aug 2008, Sep 2008, Oct 2008, Nov 2008, Dec 2008, 2008.
Artistic Tributes to Rachel Corrie Page Getting Deleted
- Can you state your opinions on User_talk:MBisanz#Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion.2FArtistic_Tributes_to_Rachel_Corrie page. Kasaalan (talk) 19:07, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Mentorship
When I read Misplaced Pages talk:Mentorship, I noticed your modest comments; and for this reason, I am reaching out to you.
Please consider reviewing my edit at Misplaced Pages:Mentorship#Unintended consequences. In the search for a mentor deemed acceptable by ArbCom, I plan to cite this as a useful context for discussing what I have in mind. --Tenmei (talk) 02:55, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Banned
This is to formally tell you that you have been banned by the Misplaced Pages community, per this discussion. Ryan Postlethwaite 13:20, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
sockpuppet editing
There is an open WP:SPI case looking at sockpuppet editing primarily on the Johann Hari/ Talk page. As you edited the Johann Hari/Talk page between 2004 and 2011, your input is welcomed. Yonmei (talk) 22:33, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Clarification motion
A case (Palestine-Israel articles) in which you were involved has been modified by motion which changed the wording of the discretionary sanctions section to clarify that the scope applies to pages, not just articles. For the arbitration committee --S Philbrick(Talk) 15:26, 27 October 2014 (UTC)