This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jiujitsuguy (talk | contribs) at 15:28, 11 January 2012 (→Naming conventions re: Jerusalem: not nice). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 15:28, 11 January 2012 by Jiujitsuguy (talk | contribs) (→Naming conventions re: Jerusalem: not nice)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
Template:Archive box collapsible
Legal statement
Hello. You have a new message at MichaelNetzer's talk page.
Communities
Hello, Sean.hoyland. You have new messages at Jiujitsuguy's talk page.You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Second Intifada & photo
Hi. Hope you enjoyed the holiday, if you celebrate, that is. (don't mean to be presumptuous). In any event, is this okay? Does it satisfy the criteria for restoration to the article? Best,--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 18:27, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- I think there are some problems that need fixing first. The 2000 Ramallah lynching article includes the line "The picture of one of the lynchers waving his blood-stained hands from the window shocked and outraged many around the world, and became another iconic image of the conflict." I'm sure it's true but it's unsourced. That probably needs a decent source first which I assume isn't difficult to find. There may already be a source that says something like that being cited for something else in the article. A similar line about its iconic nature with the same source could then be used in the Second Intifada article. That would then tie in better with the FUR. I think it's the iconic nature of the image in the context of the Second Intifada that justifies it's presence in that article. You could take the issue to the article's talk page and try to get consensus but the atmosphere in the topic area isn't exactly conducive to collaboration at the moment. Sean.hoyland - talk 10:56, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
- For example, this AP article gets close. Sean.hoyland - talk 11:07, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for your insight Sean. I'll open a discussion on the corresponding page soon enough but I'm a bit busy with RL at the moment. I will notify you when I do and welcome your participation and continued insight.--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 06:14, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
- You might be interested in Framing terrorism: the news media, the government, and the public ISBN 978-0415947190. Chapter 4, Framing the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict (pages 59-74), compares and contrasts the reporting and imagery associated with the Dura and lynching incidents, how the various media outlets handled it, how both the Israelis and Palestinians tried to exploit or contain the impact of imagery. It contains quite a lot of detail and analysis. It's quite interesting. It might be useful for the main 2000 Ramallah lynching article and perhaps the Second Intifada article to a lesser extent. Sean.hoyland - talk 09:37, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
- Heyo--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 18:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for your help on the Fair Use issue.--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 21:18, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- Heyo--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 18:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
- You might be interested in Framing terrorism: the news media, the government, and the public ISBN 978-0415947190. Chapter 4, Framing the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict (pages 59-74), compares and contrasts the reporting and imagery associated with the Dura and lynching incidents, how the various media outlets handled it, how both the Israelis and Palestinians tried to exploit or contain the impact of imagery. It contains quite a lot of detail and analysis. It's quite interesting. It might be useful for the main 2000 Ramallah lynching article and perhaps the Second Intifada article to a lesser extent. Sean.hoyland - talk 09:37, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for your insight Sean. I'll open a discussion on the corresponding page soon enough but I'm a bit busy with RL at the moment. I will notify you when I do and welcome your participation and continued insight.--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 06:14, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, Sean.hoyland. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Israel.Message added 18:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hi, I saw the change that you made on the article Barkan Mounts and subsequently a number of other, similar changes. I don't know the policy regarding Israel/WestBank naming convention on WP. As such I've opened a thread on WP:ISRAEL and would welcome your comments regarding the policy. Thanks and happy new year. Joe407 (talk) 18:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello and thank you for your advice re contributing to Israeli settlement especially the citations template. I had just done a copy and paste of another citation and changed the details. Happy to include quotations but have a question as to their best placement.
Having seen, on the talk page, your advice to another editor re including reputable source material, I had intended to include quotations in a more discursive section on the settlement as colony discussion. Usually one does not include detail such as quotations in the introduction to an article but rather to use the introduction as a predictor of what comes later in the text? Otherwise it all gets a bit top heavy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miriel2012 (talk • contribs) 07:39, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- To clarify, I really just meant a quotation via the quote= attribute in the citation rather than in the article text itself. The quote doesn't show up in the article body but it is included in the references section. See here for example and then have a look at the way the reference 6 is rendered in the Tikun Olam (blog) article. Sean.hoyland - talk 07:48, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
OK thanks, I saw the quote field but did not realise it would not appear in the text. Will look to reformatting using the template. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miriel2012 (talk • contribs) 07:57, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Template problem on South Sudan
Yes, due to a bug, if there is a reference in the "capital" field in the Country infobox template, the listings for "Capital" and "Largest city" will be separate when the infobox is rendered even if they are the same. Compare the version without the reference to the version with one. -Kudzu1 (talk) 05:05, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- Interesting, thanks, I didn't know that (obviously). Sean.hoyland - talk 05:07, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Naming conventions re: Jerusalem
Hi Sean: If, as you indicate, the question of conventions for identifying Jerusalem as being in Israel or not have no consensus and conflicts over this point crop up in a variety of articles, wouldn't it be a good idea to seek some kind of centralised consensus on this question? Do you know if there are any means for doing so within Misplaced Pages or is each article essentially a universe unto itself? BothHandsBlack (talk) 12:15, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, I think this should be standardized across Misplaced Pages with a guideline similar to WP:WESTBANK. I doubt whether it's possible to resolve though as it's such a sensitive issue for many editors. Discussions about how to handle the description of Jerusalem in the main article usually get bogged down. The place to raise the issue for a centralized discussion is at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration/Current Article Issues. Sean.hoyland - talk 13:10, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
- I've put up a proposal re: Naming Conventions for Locations in Jerusalem here (http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Israel_Palestine_Collaboration/Current_Article_Issues#Naming_Conventions_for_Locations_in_Jerusalem) and would very much appreciate any comments you have on this issue. BothHandsBlack (talk) 18:52, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
A bit surprised
You were way out of line with this comment. You have absolutely no idea who left you those hateful messages and you painted a rather broad stroke with that brush of yours. Those incendiary messages could have been left by anyone and it is certainly not out of the realm of possibility that it was left by someone whose views are diametrically opposed to the people you just maligned.--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 15:28, 11 January 2012 (UTC)