User talk:24.64.166.191

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

24.64.166.191, we have crossed paths a couple of times on Jewish-related pages, and, while your comments are intelligent, they are often quite belligerent, starting off on the attack or otherwise challenging the editors on a particular page. I have tried to respond to them in good faith, but it would be better in the future if you toned down some of the more aggressive postings, and made more of effort to engage, rather than attack. You may also want to register for a username, as it makes these sorts of ongoing discussions easier. --Goodoldpolonius2 07:16, 7 November 2005 (UTC)It is not obvious how to respond to this.


from Talk:Zionism_and_racism

So if you believe this genetic inheritance stuff gives you political or real-estate rights, aren't you a racist by definition?24.64.166.191 05:53, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

By that argument all countries giving citizenship based on jus sanguinus (right of descent, i.e. Egyptian or British citizenship because a parent was born in Egypt or Britain) are racist. 165.146.122.244 11:46, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Overlinking

Hi! It is not necessary to wikify every instance of "Jew" or "Jewish" or "Zionist" in the article Jewish state, or indeed in any other article. Generally one link per notable term per screen is plenty. Thank you. Babajobu 09:54, 9 November 2005 (UTC)Why? Is there some Wikipedia law about it?

There is a notable lack of mention of non-Jews in this racist article.24.64.166.191 10:07, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
Regardless, it is not necessary to create endless links of the above words. Babajobu 10:18, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

It seems that I have been "blocked" by User:Jayjg - reason: "trolling account - no useful edits, and a plethora nasty attacking comments".

I don't see anything in the Blocking policy to justify this. I don't think I have made any personal attacks except to disagree with his ethno-religious-nationalist beliefs ("Jews have been Zionists for 3000 years", etc.). And as for "useful edits", I have discussed these on the talk page before making any significant edits. He has typically insisted on keeping the current wording without providing any references. What does he mean by "useful" - does it support his agenda?

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../2/4/2E/User_talk%7E24.64.166.191.html"