User talk:Shuki

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Shuki, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  And Shalom! IZAK 08:49, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Archives
Shuki/Archive1

[edit] Joseph's tomb

Hi. I wanted to know if you have more information on the repainting done, when was it/pictures/who did/general information. Thanks a lot. Amoruso 21:21, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your efforts.

How's your Hebrew? Here are some pictures [1]. I can't find any other documentation, though I imagine searching through news archives of that period would relate something. --Shuki 21:49, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm Israeli. By repainting I meant repainting it back to the original color, not to green... I wanted to know if that was fixed. By the way, I came here to ask you something else - you wrote the Tel Menashe article. You know this settlement is now inside the fence which de facto means it's annexed I believe :) Amoruso 15:11, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

That's cool, but I don't believe in the fence. Especially since there are people in it and 'outside'. Unilateral moves like retreat, disengagement, and separation fence only hurt us more. And that fence cost so much money and a large part of it was the foreign steel used to make the fence. --Shuki 16:43, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

you're right. but maybe it's interesting to write that it's on that side of the fence and it passed rather quitely. I agree it's all negative, but I do think that this place won't be evacuated by Israel in any future plan. Amoruso 17:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I wish that there won't be anymore evacuations, but Sharon made an idiotic precedent by retreating from the three northern Gaza settlements which were, for all intents and purposes, already inside the fence, and a definite buffer zone between Qassams and Ashkelon too. Actually, Begin made the first precedent retreating to a line that apparently had no basis in international law. [2] Millions of dollars in hasbara, and millions of hours of volunteer work are worthless since Israel doesn't really make a case for keeping any Yesha settlement, especially the ones that have significant Jewish history. --Shuki 19:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

you're 100% correct. I totally agree. btw, (1) I hope you don't mind I borrowed the "two-way conversations readable" template from above to my talk page :) . (2) You might want to check the pages of Palestine and Lehi. Amoruso 07:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

you might be also interested in this : [3] I think the whole intro should go but there should be a strong mention that the whole transjordan was meant for the Jews originally.... Amoruso 11:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Lehi Note that the page is infringing on many wikipedia policies, and the recent one is extreme WP:POV of opinions stated as facts and in the intro page ! many other issues were addresed by me but are being reverted by a few members. Please take note of this ! very annoying no doubt. Amoruso 16:36, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know too much about it. I'll visit and try to see if I can help.

Lehi (group), last correct version before infringements is mine of 16:28. Amoruso 20:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signature

FYI, you forgot to sign your post in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akhter Munir Marwat. Cheers! -AED 05:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. --Shuki 05:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Maale Adumim

They're trying to say it's not a city in Israel. Ma'ale Adummim Amoruso 13:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] IDF and Military of Israel

Hi Shuki: Please take a look at the vote at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 September 10#Category:Israel Defense Forces. Your expertise is required. Thanks a lot. IZAK 12:11, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Shuki, isayeret.com is the best resource for Israeli Special Forces related information including weapons, gear and of course units. It's therefore allowed under Wikipedia guidelines for paysites. In addition, it's a free site from anyone browsing from Israel. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.179.5.3 (talk • contribs).

isayeret is indeed a good resource, but it is a paysite for ALL. Only contributors get free access. Please show me how this passes WP guidelines. --Shuki 20:46, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merkava

Thank you for coming in regarding the OR in the article. I had been playing reversion games with the same anonymous editor. Just wanted to thank you for your expertise and help // 3R1C 22:19, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Israel related issues

Posted somethings here, wonder if it's accessed regularly by users. such as this [4]. Amoruso 01:52, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Israel

You are invited to join the new WikiProject Israel. Please come and contribute.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eric1985 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Whoops, misunderstood... About the proposed Day Camp --> Roslyn Heights merge a few months back

I'm used to merges of articles on the same subject, not merges of articles that belong inside other articles- hence the confusion I expressed in the discussion section just now. Sorry about that.I'd still suggest removing the merge notice and proposing something different- e.g. that anything new about the day camp be included in the RHeights article, since the former is insufficiently notable. (Didn't go to that particular one myself but that's probably true.) Schissel | Sound the Note! 11:28, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay. --Shuki 18:33, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adding New Articles to Portal

I"d like to but I don't know how. If you do, then would appreciate it. Thanks.Will314159 20:19, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Just follow the link Portal:Israel/New, scroll down to October, click on the edit link on the right side and add your new contributions. --Shuki 20:24, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Green Tortoise

According to the history page, you are one of the editors who helped create the Green Tortoise article. Right now, somebody is trying to destroy your work. A self-indentified Green Tortoise employee signing in under the name "Here" has stated, on a page linked to from the Green Tortoise discussion page, that his employer "freaked out" about the article, feeling that while it was OK for some of the authors we cited to have written articles critical of his business, it was not OK for others to know about those articles or for us to tell people about them. On this basis "here" has demanded the right to remove links to any material critical of his employer, doing so in the name of NPOV!!!

How far has this gone? We've already seen pro-Green Tortoise graffiti posted to the references section, ad copy taken directly from their site used to overwrite the article, and the employee, in at least one case, create a sock puppet account (GTWebmaster) and then try to claim that somebody was supporting his position. He has threatened to file frivolous complaints against anybody refusing to go along with what he wants, as he engages in vandalism.

None of which probably sounds like anything you'd want to be around for, and I wouldn't blame you if you didn't, but it bothers you to see your work destroyed and replaced by ad copy posted by someody who has come out and said that he is a corporate shill, now is the time when I hope you will speak up. I hate to see companies find that they can turn Wikipedia into ad copy, in this case quite literally, but I can't fight this one alone. If you'd be willing to help, your help would be greatly appeciated and needed. One lone editor vs. an entire company is not a fair fight, and sooner or later you know that this guy will bring in his coworkers. -65 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.182.172.73 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Faqqua

Where does it say that Faqqua is a city?? Do you mean the category?? If you changed that, thank you. I´m new at this. When it comes to the relvancy of the article, I´ll try to clarify further. --Sonofliberty 14:00, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

That's ok, it was only the category. --Shuki 20:45, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

The reason why I wrote terrorist groups as well as jewish underground forces was to mark a distinction between the two. Jewish terrorist groups did in fact exist prior to the Israeli independence, a statement which is undisputed among scholars and other researchers. Some of these groups used the same tactics as Hamas and other Palestinian goups do today, so it´s fair to call them terrorist groups. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sonofliberty (talk • contribs).

Whoa, thanks for revealing your intentions which in the current article have absolutely nothing to do with the residents of this village. The article had dramatical elements in it that I was hoping would turn into fact, but I see that that has not happened yet. The unfinshed paragraph should go. --Shuki 08:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Worthy?

I'm not sure what you mean by 'worthy', but yeah I've seen this site before. Been referred to it a number of times, but have never become very interested because it requires you to pay for even the most basic information. Unless there's a way to bypass that which I don't know? -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 21:34, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

It's supposed to be free in Israel. It used to block me but now I have access. Try again. Now, worthy as in worthy of WP. I do not know if it passes notability or WP:WEB. --Shuki 22:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your vote

Al- Aqsa is indeed third holiest site and this claim is not disputed. This is just a comment on your Keep vote which is a disappointment. --- ابراهيم 12:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Noahide Laws cleanup

Hi, I was hoping we could collaborate on cleaning splitting and writing up more articles related to 7mBn. I've tagged Noahide laws for a cleanup. I'm not rushing in, I've read them all up, I'm waiting for the readiness of a few others so we can take this on together, and have it featured on the main page sometime. Its possible, there are quite a few of us and will potentialy be a subject of interest. Again, I'm one for words and think the parent article should be Seven Laws of Noach, as in 'Sheva Mitzvas Bnei Noach'. Anything that is should be another 'ism'. Chavatshimshon 01:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Chavat: Do not change that title, it is the accepted English name for it (why is it that you have this great urge to change the titles of long-establishe Wikipedia articles?) Not everything has to be a direct translation or transliteration from Hebrew. Many Judaic and Hebraic topics do and should retain their English titles. Please contact the following to help you: User:Noahlaws; User:Jon513; User:Dauster; User:HKT; User:PinchasC; User:Shirahadasha; User:Shuki; User:TShilo12, they all have knowledge of Jewish Law and experience as Wikipedians and may be interested in working on this with you. Sincerely, IZAK 21:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, please join in the discussion on the Noahide Laws talk page about cleaning it up etc. Thanks! Chavatshimshon 08:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Map of Districts of Israel - Consensus Building

In an effort to head off WP:3RR action, I am inviting discussion about the Map of the Districts of Israel.--Eliyahu S ^Talk 16:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion

Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion FYI: Hi Tomer! A Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion has asserted itself in the Korban article. The project indicates that it is an umbrella project for all of religion and that the current religion projects are subprojects of it, yet its member directory lists only six members. Where is the project coming from? Is it a broadbased project, a very small group with a very big reach, or what? If you know some background or some of its people, would be much appreciated. Best, --Shirahadasha 03:56, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Shira: I noticed this comment. Their assertion is outrageous and false and should be rejected and disputed to the full. There is no "supreme council of religion" on Wikipedia and there never will be. Each religion has its experts and contributors on Wikipedia and none of them will ever tolerate interference from outside busy-bodies. Judging by their user pages, the members of this "religion" project are obviously coming from a Christian POV and seems they now wish to "double dip," pretty funny actually. See my notice on that page, below. Thanks, and may the Lights of Chanukah dispel all ignorance and darkness. IZAK 10:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NOTICE and OBJECTIONS to WikiProject Religion vs. Judaism

Hi: Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion#Judaism. Thanks, IZAK 10:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

NOTICE and OBJECTIONS:

1. No-one has the right to take upon themselves to be the controlling "project" for every religion on Earth!
2. Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism has been, and shall remain an independent project and will not accept interference in its work based on the assertion that editors not familiar with Judaism's traditions have a self-appointed "right" to interfere with Judaism-related articles by mere dint of being members of a "religion" project.
3. So far, as of 12/21/06 the mere six members of this project, are mostly Christian, (as self-described on their user pages) and raises the question, why don't they do their work in Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity (81 members as of 12/21/06)? How can a project with six members "pass judgment" on other projects with one hundred and twenty four members?
4. What will members of other projects, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam (64 members as of 12/21/06) think and react when "religion project" editors will advise what's best for Islam-related articles or not?
5. Note: Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism adheres to WP:NPOV and is one of the oldest Wikipedia projects with over one hundred and twenty members (as of 12/21/06), a number of whom are respected sysops as well, highly knowledgeable about many matters relating to Category:Jews and Judaism.
6. It would not be advisable for anyone to interfere with Judaism-related articles or Hebrew Bible-related topics that ignores the broad based consensus and general agreement that exists between Jewishly-oriented editors of Judaic articles, many of which touch upon Jews because being Jewish includes being both a part of Judaism as well as being part of an ethnicity, and a project on "religion" alone cannot and does not have the scope to touch upon issues that effects not just Jews and Judaism, but also Israel and Jewish history, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish history (with 33 members as of 12/21/06) and a broad range of related issues and projects, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish culture (19 members as of 12/21/06) and Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel (23 members as of 12/21/06).
7. Finally, Wikipedia is not the forum to create a de facto neo-"ecumenical project" which is only bound to cause confusion and resentment and will result in confusion and chaos and inevitabley violate Wikipedia:No original research; Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought; and Wikipedia:Avoid neologisms.

Thank you for taking this matter seriously. IZAK 09:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Three pilgrim festivals" vs. "Three pilgrimage festivals"

Hi Shuki: Question: What should be the name for the Shalosh Regalim: the Three pilgrim festivals or the Three pilgrimage festivals? Please see the discussion at Talk:Three pilgrimage festivals#Name. Thanks you. IZAK 17:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kavod HaBriyot#Requesting Comments

See: Talk:Kavod HaBriyot#Requesting Comments. Thanks, IZAK 02:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for the award :) I hope to continue contributing to Israel- and IDF-related articles in the future. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 14:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleaning up Israeli law firms

Thank you for your message on my talk page. I can reassure you I had no hidden motive when cleaning up Israeli law firms articles. It turns out that I bumped into the article Luzzatto & Luzzatto because it started with "Luzzatto & Luzzatto is a firm of patent attorneys in Israel." I am particularly interested in anything relevant to patent attorney (I created the article patent attorney in 2004). During the debate Articles for deletion/Luzzatto & Luzzatto, User:Benqish mentioned a couple of Israli law firms that may need to be deleted as well. So I digged into it.

Note that on Wikipedia you should assume good faith: Assume that people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it. Your suspicion is uncalled-for, and calling my contributions a crusade, that is "a vigorous, aggressive movement for the defense or advancement of an idea, cause, etc." [5] has offended me. I consider neutrality of utmost importance both in the content of articles and in the process of editing them. You may apologize. --Edcolins 23:18, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, I certainly don't mean to offend editors. I assume good faith when [multiple] edits by a single editor are not concentrated in the same subject (law) and one characteristic (country - Israel) is singled out over others in the same category. I assume good faith when someone not as learned on a certain subject implies that certain stubs are less valid than others. I hope that I can apologize when you can prove by continuing this effort across the board. --Shuki 23:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Too late for the apology anyway. You may have looked at my past contributions as well. The burden of proving bad faith is on you, not on me to prove my good faith, that's the fundamental principle of assuming good faith. If all edits or all series of edits (whatever the subject) were questionable because the contributor had not proven his good faith when editing, we would probably have endless debates and we would go nowhere. I don't want to enter in any kind of antagonizing dialogue. Let's argue on content not on persons. I have nominated some articles for deletion and questioned the notability of others. Which particular one is notable for you? I am of course prepared to change my mind if WP:CORP is met. --Edcolins 00:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Go ahead, make your WP:POINT. Some minor research can tell you that I do not have any particular interest in law (or lawyer jokes either) or the time to start expanding law stubs at this time of the year. Go ahead nominate all law firms in Israel for deletion. According to that attitude, most articles from non-English speaking countries should frankly be deleted as well. Less google, less english URLs. On top of that, virtually law firm articles should be Afd'd as well. I don't know the law too well, but nominating the article on the third largest firm in any foreign country for deletion is suspect. 'Bundling' ALL law firm articles in a category is certainly bad faith. You're right, you don't have to prove anything to me especially when 30 minutes is past the tolerance level for an apology. So much for proving the point and good faith. Enjoy the cleanup. --Shuki 00:46, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

When all of the articles in a single category are created by the same editor and that editor does not provide any evidence to satisfy the notability guidelines of Wikipedia, then deleting all of those articles in a single category is justified per the rules of this website. It would be the same if it were Ukranian widgets or Israeli law firms. I believe you may have a good point though, Shuki, and it would be best if everyone involved just stays cool. ju66l3r 21:28, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shas

I have been reverting an anonymous editor to the Shas page who keeps replacing "religion" with "halacha". Whilst he is technically correct, anyone reading the article who is not familiar with the Jewish faith will have no idea what it means. Religion is a harmless and obvious replacement (obvious to people what it is, and also obvious that it refers to Jewish religion), and would be used in any article about religious parties.

In addition, I am slightly bewildered by some of the "ideology" which has been added to the article. I deleted the anti-corruption bit (it's not that they're for it, but they really can't be said to be anti), but the "against religious coercion" I don't really buy. What do you think? Number 57 20:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, sorry for the delay. I disagree with watering down halacha to 'Jewish religion'. The beauty of WP is that if a user doesn't understand a word, s/he can use the wikilink. I will check the rest of the article soon for the other issues. --Shuki 22:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP Israel Award

I, Eric1985, award you the WikiProject Israel IDF Tag for your efforts to prevent vandalism and POV in Israel pages.

[edit] New Article

Isn't that what non-orthodox means? lol. --יהושועEric 00:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, usually secular means 'without religion', but now that I went to the secular wp page (that could be written better), it states that secular is 'seperate of organized religion' and not necessarily atheism. I dunno. 'Secular' seems to be closer to 'lack of religion' than not-religious. I've been to a specific kibbutz which could be definitely defined as secular, but most Israeli Jews are not pure secular and relatively more devout (and/or superstitious) than the western secular gentiles whose families might have been members of a church at one time. --Shuki 20:42, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Israel & territories map

Would it be more acceptable to you if the map was recaptioned "Israel with the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Golan Heights" - eliminating the collective term "territories" altogether? -- ChrisO 07:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Israeli news websites

Why did you remove The Jerusalem Post, Haaretz and Yated Neeman from this category? You say "please read the cat description as well as the talk discussion on the cat". The category says "Israeli News websites." I think it's pretty indisputable that these are Israeli news websites (as well as being newspapers) - the primary justification for this is that the web versions carry stories that do not appear in the print version (or different versions of the stories in the print version). Unless you want to create separate articles for jpost.com and haaretz.com, I suggest they be included in the catgories. Number 57 21:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

It is simple. The news website cat includes websites, not newspapers, or newspapers that have websites. All respectable newspapers around the world operate websites, so it is also redundant to have two cats (newspapers and news websites) with the same listings. In Israel, it would be a few dozen, in the US a few thousand.

The three articles I removed from the cat are not seperate entities from the main newspaper company but rather online reprints, while the other articles in that cat are distinct entities. A litmus test I always suggest is to go to similar major articles (which definitely have major traffic viewing and editing) and see how it's been done there. The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, and USA Today all have very professional websites, but they are not listed under Category:News websites. On the other hand, OpinionJournal.com, which exists only online, is. --Shuki 21:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

But you have ignored my main point; whilst some stories are reprints, others are individual to the online version and do not appear in the print one. Thus, as I concluded at the end of the last point, unless you want to create articles about the websites, it would be best to include them in the category, though in my eyes this is not the way to go - the Ynet article is pretty pointless and will never develop beyond a stub (and why there is even a separate one for Ynetnews is mindboggling), and should just be part of the full Yediot Aharonot article. Number 57 21:55, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Whoa, highly disagree and I haven't ignored your main point, you are misunderstanding me. Virtually all newspapers have websites, and there is no absolutely no reason, in 2007, to categorise this since it is even taken for granted. Many major newspapers websites are also updated often with news flashes, and articles that don't appear in the print editions. These shouldn't (and do not in any other category) clutter up the 'websites' categories which group entities that are mainly websites. Read similar arguments here Talk:CNN.com.

I'm sure you know that while Ynet is a wing of Yediot, it (like NRG) is a distinctive unit that some even say will overtake the print version. It might take some material from the daily newspaper, but it has been allowed to develop extensively beyond jpost, haaretzonline, and yeted neeman. There used to be a seperate jpost.com article in WP, but it was merged with the main article since it is not distinct. The ynet article, like many other Israeli stubs won't develop because there is not much to add in English. BUT that's not a good comparision, it is better to go to its Hebrew article, or here he:קטגוריה:אתרי חדשות.

Ynetnews, on the other hand, is not significantly different from ynet. If you put a merge template on that article, you might succeed.--Shuki 22:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiTalmud

I just started a new project with a friend that I think you might be interested in. I would love for your imput and help in starting this up. Our goal: An internet wiki database that contains the major Jewish texts and a forum for discussing and arguing halacha. Check it out: WikiTalmud. --יהושועEric 06:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] That map again

I've changed the map's colours again following your earlier comments - please see Image:Is-wb-gs-gh v2.png and let us know what you think on Image talk:Israel and occupied territories map.png. -- ChrisO 18:14, 2 April 2007 (UTC)