User talk:Gilisa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello Gilisa! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Runcorn 20:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC) Getting started Wikipedia tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting help Frequently asked questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Building consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

[edit] Contact Information

Gili, could you please send to me your email address at Haifa? William R. Buckley 07:24, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recent Contributions

Firstly, I want to thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

After noticing your recent edits to Georg Cantor, I looked at some of your other edits. I cleaned up some of your edits for better spelling, grammar, and formatting. However, I decided that the claims in a few of your edits were unsupported.

For instance, I reverted your edits to Georg Cantor. Even without your edits, the background of Cantor seems to already be a point of contention. In addition, the article already mentions his possible ethnic Jewish background. Without sources to support your assertion, I think what is said should be sufficient in this regard. From WP:V#Burden_of_evidence:

Any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged needs a reliable source, which should be cited in the article.

I encourage you to cite the source you used when making your edits. Doing so, I will gladly withdraw my objections. I also hope you look at the changes I have made to your other edits to see that you agree. Please let me know if you have concerns. David H. Flint 11:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

In addition to what David H. Flint already mentioned, I don't think we needed more footnotes on Georg Cantor's Jewish background in that article. You copied and pasted another block of banter from some self-published website, and in the process lengthened the article even more than necessary. The length was already really burdensome. --Tellerman

Gilisa, what other "Jewish symbols" did Cantor use besides the Aleph? And what researcher wrote that his use of the aleph is evidence for a Jewish family? Isaac Newton studied Hebrew too. Would you use that as evidence that Isaac Newton was from a Jewish family? I think maybe you should just limit your attempts at trying to establish Georg Cantor as Jewish. It doesn't seem to be relevant to him personally in any way, and indeed your latest copies and pastes are really lengthening the article to an unnecessary degree. There has been very long arguments over the stressing of Georg Cantor's possible Jewish heritage on the discussion page, and the agreement seems to be to keep his background a big question mark. Maybe they were Jewish, maybe they weren't. But your recent additions have broken this agreement. I would suggest you remove them. --Tellerman

Gilisa, by adding the category Sephardi Jews you are already making the judgement that several biographers of Cantor are wrong in their research. We shouldn't do this. Secondly, the information you're copying and pasting is from a webpage that I don't think many would consider suitable as a reference by itself. I still think we should abridge the note as much as possible, and not just copy and paste one from another webpage, especially one like jinfo.org. --Tellerman

you allready make the judgment that he wasnt a Jew, it seems like you just want it to be like that . there is a good possabilty thet he was a Sephardic jew and so this is just fair to add him to this category . i dont accept your notice as well, you are not objective for my opinion -and so i suggest that we compramise on that we shouldnt mention any refernce ,espcially when you dont get into detalis. when you said that 2 references consider him a Jew, 2 as partialy jew and 4 as non Jewish- its very clear for me that you tend the opinion of any viewer to the conclusion that he wasnt a Jew , which is, especially when we consider newer evidence -not likely. and jewish info-is much more reliable then you suggest.--Gilisa

I moved your response here so I could address it by parts. I did not already make the judgement that he wasn't a Jew by removing the category. Default for wikipedia is not having a category at all. Take for example that the Georg Cantor article doesn't have him in a Danish category, but that doesn't mean his father wasn't Danish. Actually there are only three that say he was not Jewish because the two authors at the end are co-writers. The only reason there are three as opposed to two that say he was is because thats the way it is. If you can find another biography or published professional opinion that says he was then you can, of course, add to it as long as it doesn't stretch out into a huge note. Just keep the references as brief as possible and that will be fine. --Tellerman

[edit] Some basic editing guidelines

Hello, I thought I would let you know of a few guidelines we follow when we edit articles:

• Please use an edit summary when making edits. This is useful for other editors to see at a glance what were the changes you made.
• Please use the Preview button (right beside the Save Page button) when making changes, so that you don't have to make numerous minor edits one right after another. This keeps the history smaller and allows other editors to see more easily what changes you made.
• If you make minor edits, please check the "Minor Edit" checkbox right above the Save Page button.
• When writing on talk pages, please leave your signature by typing four tildas (~~~~). Contributions to articles are not signed (I noticed you had done this in Albert Einstein, which I see has since been removed).
• Please make an effort to spellcheck your contributions and write them with correct capitalization, formatting and grammar. Remember that this is an encyclopedia article and should read as such.

Thanks and happy editing, Icemuon 15:51, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

ok, i guess you are right. i have to improve my english as im not a native speaker, its much easier for me in spanish\hebrew or arabic.any way , i will do my best to follow your reasonable comments and to keep an apropriate acadmic level when i get to edit any article at wikipedia.--Gilisa 16:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Great! Best wishes, Icemuon 16:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] English usage

Hi Gilisa, I realize that English is not your native language; so this some friendly advice to improve your written English (and explain my modification of your edits in Albert Einstein. The expression "alot of" is too informal for written English; write "many" instead. Also do not put a space before a period or comma, but do put space after a period or comma before the next letter. --teb728 17:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Glorious Iran

I had to undo your edit to Iran. At the time of Shapur I's conquest of the region, the Judeans had already been kicked out for misbehaving, so the region is to be called Palestine. Even if they hadn't been kicked out, Judea would have been used, not Israel. The use of Palestine was not intended to be a political statement or anything like that, so don't make the change again. Just letting you know, thanks. The Behnam 23:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I meant the Zealots, more specifically. I don't have anything against the Judeans, but there is no denying that misbehavior was the reason they were kicked out. Perhaps it was a case of judging an entire people by the actions of a few. The use of "Glorious" refers to the reign of Shapur I, though you do not have to agree with me. Even though your post on my talk page was highly uncivil, I found it somewhat amusing so I'll let you off easy this time. But I probably will remove it from my page, as is the usual remedy for trolling. Cheers. The Behnam 01:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the polite response. Your first statement 'trollish' because you threatened to meet me in the coming war.

Anyway, I said "misbehavior" precisely because certain acts against Rome, such as the rebellions, led to the exile (being kicked out) from Judea. From Rome's perspective, rebellion could be called misbehavior. I did not intend any antisemitic meaning; I think it is perfectly reasonable that the Judeans fought against the occupiers of the land they had lived in for centuries.

As far as Persia goes, perhaps you were thinking of the Greeks under Alexander? The Romans never conquered Persia, though they fought often, with no definite victor. Shortly before the Islamic Conquest, the Byzantine Romans managed to regain all land they had lost to Persia over the centuries.

Since it seems that the name issue was a misunderstanding between us, I will remove the warning I gave you earlier. Have a good one. The Behnam 10:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 18:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I replied, but you should try signing your posts. It's on my talk page. Basically I'm just saying you should reference it and I apologize for putting it as vandalism. I'll do a null edit to make sure everyone knows it wasn't that. Bsroiaadn 09:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hi Gilisa

Sure, go ahead and change it. I'm just the copy editor, I've been trying to take all the sentences the real writers put in and make them into proper English with good references, that's all. I hope I didn't misunderstand and mangle something you wrote, but if I did go right in and fix it up.
Haifa? My best friend's dad was a university professor there for years, last name Tabak. She lives in Tel Aviv now, she sends me pictures of herself with The Cats. :) Good luck, and write on! ~ Otterpops 16:17, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your comment on my talk page

I moved your comments on my talk page together with my replies to Talk:Alfred Einstein. I thought you would surely see them there, but apparently that was a bad assumption. Sorry, I guess I should have left you a note on this talk page. --teb728 09:08, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Could you have a look at these articles and their talk?

Could you have a look at these articles and their talk?

• Jewish reactions to intelligent design
• Jewish opposition to evolution

I feel the articles are extremely well sourced and balanced. I'd like somebody else to remove the tags. Please look at my last versions, because I have run up against somebody from the evolution/creation universe who wants to pick a fight. --Metzenberg 04:33, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Gilisa. I believe in evolution! I also feel that there is no incompatibility between science and Judaism. The study of evolutionary biology in all forms illuminates and increases our understanding of creation. I'm afraid that the person that is being so difficult is neither an evolutionist or a creationist. He is some kind of troll. --Metzenberg 07:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)