Talk:David Ha'Ivri

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Judaism Portal
David Ha'Ivri is part of WikiProject Judaism, a project to improve all articles related to Judaism. If you would like to help improve this and other articles related to the subject, consider joining the project. All interested editors are welcome. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Judaism articles.
Project Judaism To-do:
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

[edit] OR

I just discovered this article clearly created/maintained by Single-purpose accounts. IMO, the subject is definitely notable enough for an article but a lot/most of the current one is admitted OR and maybe COI as well, which ain't proper. --Shuki 08:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Your changes were good, Shuki, except Ha'ivri was the local head of council, which is roughly equivalent to a mayor. I've added what is probably the most relevant part of Ha'Ivri's life, that he started the "Revava" movement... I think what is missing here is more explicit referencing to other sources, for as you say, it does appear to be Original Research even though most of this materiel has been on line in the form of video for some time. -- Ð’ntalk 17:41, 26 August 26 2007 (UTC)
The article was originally deleted (at David Haivri) after I prodded it. Is this enough to get is speedy deleted? Number 57 16:38, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
D'n, a mayor is a mayor. Maybe Haivri was the head of council, (prove it) not the head of the local council. N57, Haivri is definitely notable and getting that quote from Martian Amanpour (yet unproven) is a major medal of honour so a deletion is just putting off the inevitable anyway. But, the current article is not close to WP standards and reads more like a COI biography, besides the blatant admitted OR interview over coffee. I propose three options; adding 'citation' tags to every sentence and then deleting anything that is not referenced after a week, being bold and chopping it up now and leaving only the referenced parts, or giving the authours a bit of time to get serious. What do you think? --Shuki 19:18, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough, but yes, it does need a total rewrite. The article is even worse than the whole Yehuda HaKohen etc series in terms of its detail. Which local council was he head of (the article doesn't say)? The quote from Meir Kahane is quite interesting (and indeed worrying!). Number 57 08:03, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
No argument, both that a mayor is a mayor (and a city is not a settlement), and the article is very much in need of sourcing. I think that the authors would utilize that bit of time to "get serious"; I'm in communication with them external to Wiki. A bio is not a resume, and if they can't get citations and references then it's Original Research. And we know what place that has in Wiki -- Ð’ntalk 21:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
WP:CSD#G4 only applies to articles deleted under AfD. I agree this article needs a total rewrite, however. --Dreaded Walrus t c 05:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Also... this article should not be at David_HaIvri (notice capital "i" that I thought was an L, originally). That's a clear attempt at avoiding having the page at the old deleted page, David Haivri. I will move this page back to David Haivri now, away from David HaIvri, which is the current location. --Dreaded Walrus t c 05:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Done. --Dreaded Walrus t c 05:17, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
AGF. In Hebrew, 'Ha' at the beginning of the word is literally 'the'. Ha- Ivri means ' the Hebrew'. The consensus reached about a year ago of anglicizing Hebrew names is that the letter after the Ha is also capitalized. Please revert back to HaIvri. Yeah, in arial font the uppercase 'i' looks like and the uppercase 'L', but pronouncing Haivri as Hay-vry is probably worse. Please revert back to HaIvri. --Shuki 06:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I see now with the name. In that case, surely it should be at Ha'Ivri, as suggested in the article? I'll move it back to whichever, really. Let me know which one it should be at. :) --Dreaded Walrus t c 07:13, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
I think Ha'Ivri would be best -- Ð’ntalk 21:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
I've moved the page to David Ha'Ivri, per the discussion here. Sorry it took me so long to come by, I must have missed it on my watchlist when your response came, originally. Remember that any registered user can use the move page function, you didn't have to wait for me, I'm just a user like all of you. :) --Dreaded Walrus t c 14:40, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] original article

hey, i originally wrote the article on haivri, i was the one with permission from his family to write them in and permission to use his photo from a web-site. i dont know what happened to this article, seems more and more people think relevance is non and irrelevance is important and the article turned to shit. somehow i was edited out of ever writing the article on him- which i'm not sure how but i'm not under history- and this version, insofar i found closest to the original. Axe1216 04:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC) -also, it looks much better (aesthetically and less resume' like)Axe1216 04:54, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

A) If you would look at your talk page, you'd see that many warnings were left for your attention. B) I suggest that you read up on some basic guidelines for editing WP (wikipedia), other than the basic ones that I added to your talk page, especially issues about WP:OR, WP:BIO, WP:POV, WP:CIVILITY. To put it simply, there are rules here about a minimal standard of material and level of verifiability. Doing personal interviews with the family is considered Original Research. There's also some basic rule about not to get offended about having your editing edited. --Shuki 19:04, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

shuki, firstly, let me just say i have the right to get offended at whatever i want. and in a republic you cannot make a 'rule' against people's emotions. second, this version of the article has some obvious problems, "This biographical article or section is written like a resume. Please help improve this article by revising it to be neutral and encyclopedic. (help) This article or section needs sources or references that appear in reliable, third-party publications. Alone, primary sources and sources affiliated with the subject of this article are not sufficient for an accurate encyclopedia article. Please include more appropriate citations from reliable sources. The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved." taken from the top as well as a statement that you (or whomever) is posting spam. Next, original research is a fine line. i could have written my data on a blog and used that as a resource and there would be no complaint about original resources because it was already posted somewhere else (which, by the way this new version doesnt have any references at all). Further, the re-write has (what it would be called if this were literature) plot holes. there is a lot of time missing and info given that was taken out. if the truth somehow goes against the kahanist version of truth- that is not my problem. Axe1216 00:42, 22 September 2007 (UTC)


you know, i'm looking at the edits and they are bullshit- you take out his parents' names, that he was not born in a practicing jewish family, his parents divorce. and you are claiming this is a biography, and somehow no one seems to think you have alterer motives and probably know of him and follow his theology. thats what i'm betting, that stuff (somehow) isnt good for your movement. understand.Axe1216 00:47, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Just a few things. He wasn't saying you don't have a right to have emotions, he was saying that we have guidelines and policies against being aggressive, and uncivil. He also linked you to a couple of those policies. I am occasionally offended by someone or something, but I am still civil. Secondly, with regards to your comment on "original research is a fine line", you could not have posted something on a blog first, as blogs are explicitly stated as not being reliable sources (simply because anyone can put anything on a blog). You are right that it has no proper references right now, which is why it is tagged as such. --Dreaded Walrus t c 00:55, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
More:
  • Axe, that right does not exist here on WP and on top of that please read this too: Wikipedia:Ownership of articles.
  • Re Biography, why do you insist on printing David's trials and tribulations of growing up life story here? Is it a homey get to know high school reunion story or the article for someone at the national and international level?
  • Did you really create the page or was it Mazeartist who claims to have created the page. Are you using two usernames? --Shuki 23:08, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

no i'm not using two user names. i'm not even saying dont edit the article . what i'm saying is this completely unsourced version edited out (about) half the information given, like his real name, his parents name, his upbringing,... almost everything from before 1990. trials and tribulations is objective especially when what i'm saying should be included in a biography is (and for the third time) things like the name he was given at birth, his parents names, when he moved to israel (which was in part a result of his parent's divorce), etc. the fluffy ('resume' style) info, doesnt make this a better article. Axe1216 15:20, 26 September 2007 (UTC)