User talk:GHcool

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives
Archive 1 - Oct. 2006 through Feb. 2008 - Pco, PalestineRemembered complaints, Katrina analogy, User page AN/I's ...

[edit] Mediation note

(copied from talk page.)

Dear Sm8900,
Again, thanks for your interest in the mediation I am involved in. However, I would appreciate it if you would not make comments directly on the mediation talk page. As JaapBoBo said on 23 December, you are welcome to leave comments on either my or his user talk page, but the mediation page itself should be reserved only for me, JaapBoBo, and the mediator. Thank you for understanding and I trust it won't happen again. --GHcool (talk) 20:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

hi. thanks for your note. i understand your concerns, and I don't mind you making that request. however, i'm not sure i understand. Aren't other editors allowed to generally post in a mdeiation? Sorry, but this was my understanding. could you please explain why that is such a problem? thanks. --Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 22:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

The reason it is a problem is because we have had experience in this mediation with a user that inappropriately tried to influence the mediator against my position. All sides agreed that it was best to keep the mediation talk page between the two actors involved and the mediator in order to avoid suspicions of unfairness. See here for details. --GHcool (talk) 22:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, that sounds fair enough. I think i can respect your request, thanks very much for your explanation and details. --Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 22:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Please do not censor necessary views nor ownarticles. There's a discussion page to build up a consensus.

In regard to diff.

In the discussion it was clear that Petras' opinions had to be included. It could well be discussed ( think someone did) wether the lack of non-Jewish opinions is not due to undue weight (WP:OWN) in favor of certain tendency. The paragraph on Petras was proportionate and, in any case, it doesn't entitle you to just delete it.

That is WP:Tendentious editing. Please don't do that again ever. --Sugaar (talk) 04:48, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Please, be constructive. Not discussing and trying to censor on brute force will bring you nowehere. You are already in breach of so many policies and guidelines... and it's very clear that you are just trying to censor Petras viewpoint on whatever grounds. That's not possibly according to Wikipedia's policies, specially WP:NPOV - but also many others.

Please remain cool, avoid a confrontation that will bring you nowhere, discuss calmly and stay away from trying to control the content of articles as if you owned them, which is not the case. Read also WP:3RR too. --Sugaar (talk) 07:13, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] You should have been informed

I believe Sugaar has forgotten to inform you of this.--Little Stupid (talk) 10:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC).

He knows perfectly diff. --Sugaar (talk) 07:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Israeli-Palestinian conflict

You may have been provided misinformation that had a material effect on your decision. I provided sources, primarily for your benefit, that seem to make the claim that "Palestinian Arab" is an insult appear rather absurd. I hope you have a chance to review it and then reevaluate your decision as you see fit. [1] Regards, Doright (talk) 16:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Second Intifada RfC

Hi, can you respond to this RfC for me, please? Thanks. ← Michael Safyan^(talk) 01:03, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I prefer not to comment. Both sides make legitimate points. Thanks for calling this to my attention though. --GHcool (talk) 04:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Films coordinator elections

The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:33, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] About the film editing article

Please don't lecture me about 3RR. I admit I was too hasty, but two editors start an edit war, not one. Such brinkmanship as reverting an article for two times and threatening the other editor to not to revert again is in direct contrast with the principle behind 3RR. But I guess these logical fallacies don't reason well with you, and since I have no intention of taking a "philosophy course" as you advised, I'll just keep it to the facts: First, if you look closely, you actually reverted three times, myself twice; second, the rule concerns more than three reverts under 24 hours, and neither of us have violated it. Does your logic contemplate this?

As for the revert in question - the information was added by another user, and I simply saw no reason to remove or change it. You ask for a citation, but the whole article is basically uncited. The edit itself is reasonable enough - if it is unverifiable, your version of the edit is as unverifible as well ("changed drastically" and just "challenged"). However, since you disagree, the contributor doesn't seem to be around, and I myself know nothing of film editing, I will remove it. Herunar (talk) 16:04, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Gelber

Hi, the link between the table of content of Gelber's book and the description of Gelber's theory in wikipedia (and how to title this) seems logical to me. They must fit to each other. And if they don't, it means wikipedia doesn't introduce Gelber's theory properly. And As I explained in the talk's page, Gelber doesn't try to find excuse or has not apologetic approach to the events of april-may 1948. You can be convinced of this in reading his book, if not, in writing to him or in reading his book table of contents if you don't agree proceeding to former two steps. Rgds, Ceedjee (talk) 19:44, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

C'est amusant d'effacer sans discuter ? Le grand avantage à connaître plus de langues que l'autre, c'est de pouvoir mieux comprendre. Ceedjee (talk) 22:08, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I don't speak French. Also, the title is in line with Wikipedia policy. If you wish to discuss it, please use the talk page of the article instead of my own personal talk page. --GHcool (talk) 22:09, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

C'est ce que j'ai fait mais tu ne sembles pas très ouvert à la discussion. Aurais-tu un problème avec les Juifs ? Ceedjee (talk) 22:11, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

As I said, I don't speak French. All future French statements will be ignored. --GHcool (talk) 22:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Ignorant ? Ceedjee (talk) 22:23, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

No, just not fluent in French. Please refrain from personal attacks. Thanks. --GHcool (talk) 23:22, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Defender of the Wiki Barnstar" awarded, for being a defender of the Wiki

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		I hereby award you the "Defender of the Wiki Barnstar" for your tireless effort and brilliant execution; (sometimes with both hands tied behind the back); in defending Wikipedia in maintaining a neutral point of view on the most contentious articles regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict; (recently in Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus). Let others learn from you (me included), how it can be done with class. Itzse (talk) 18:45, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your user page nominated for deletion

He doesn't seem to have told you, but Timour Derevenko has nominated your userpage for deletion. You may wish to comment at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:GHcool. Sam Blacketer (talk) 23:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

My apologies, I had forgotten. This is the first time I have nominated for deletion. -Timour Derevenko (talk) 00:03, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:GHcool

I thought this might interest you. --GHcool (talk) 17:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for calling my attention to this attempt to curtail your ability to design your own user page. As you can see, I have taken approriate action. I hope the defense goes well. Screen stalker (talk) 23:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for voting Keep in my MfD poll. With your help, the debate ended with "no consensus" (although a large majority voted to "keep"). --GHcool (talk) 21:01, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I am glad. It is your user page, so logic tells me you should be able to design it. Screen stalker (talk) 12:30, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ancient Jewish coinage

Hi GHcool; I've just started something that has been on the great part missing in Wikipedia; and that is ancient Jewish coinage. I'm not good in formatting; so can I please ask you to organize it neatly. The articles so far affected are Hashmonean coinage and List of historical currencies with many more to come; time permitting. Thank you for any help you can give me. Itzse (talk) 00:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I know nothing about ancient Jewish coinage and wouldn't even know where to begin to look for that kind of information. I don't think I'll be much help on either of the two articles you asked about. I wish you the best of luck. --GHcool (talk) 00:53, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Now ur talking ^^ =

GHcool, u may find that strange, but i want to thank u for ur recent edits in history of arab israeli conflict, and camp david accords article, that ended the disputes we've had there. i hope u continue solving these matter the same way, and thanx again. One last pharaoh (talk) 12:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Need small bit of help

Hi. Could I ask you for a small favor? could you please keep an eye on Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Please note my last revision. thanks. --Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 13:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Israeli-Palestinian conflict is already in my watchlist. You're doing a fine job, but I'm glad to help as well. --GHcool (talk) 16:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good! thanks for your reply. and thanks also for your very kind and helpful words. I would like to say that I also have found your work there to be very worthwhile. thanks. --Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 17:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR on Camp David Accords

You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule . Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

EdJohnston (talk) 01:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Have a cookie

Me what do u want? _{Your Hancock Please} has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

[edit] Mystifying deletion needs a self-revert.

Hi GHcool - I really think you should explain yourself and self-revert this according to this. Not mentioned there is that you appear to have stalked me to an article you'd never edited in 3 years. As you appeared to have stalked, and reverted, another article only 24 hours earlier. PR^talk 00:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Having removed excellent modern scholarly information pertaining to the actions of the Romans, calling it "Fringe", you've now added a reference which, according to Amazon, is sub-titled "Why Israel must maintain exclusive control over Jerusalem".

I don't have an objection to your reference (though its highly partisan nature needs to be displayed), but removing the modern and academic majority position is wholly unacceptable to policy, as you know. I call on you to self-revert Haaretz's review of Prof Shlomo Sands book back into the article. Your alternative suggestion, to remove the entire section/topic, is also very puzzling. PR^talk 08:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Note

At a recent complaint I've raised on ANI, editors have accused me of going against consensus. I request that, on top of editing the page with a (somewhat vague) direction to my discussion,[2] that you add a comment on the talk page that you agree with my statement. Cheers, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 07:09, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

My edits do not reflect that I agree with your statement. Sometimes my edits reflect that I independently come to the same conclusions as you. (I apologize for answering you this way, but the way you worded your statement on my talk page forces me to in order to avoid accusations of canvassing). --GHcool (talk) 16:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I understand the response. Regardless, the time stamps tell a different story though. i.e. that you've come to your own conclusion and that I only afterwards requested you also leave a talk page comment regarding your edit.

Cordially, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 17:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:CANVAS

Your recent comments on WT:Israel (e.g. this) are pretty much in violation of WP:CANVAS as they are clearly requesting intervention on a certain side of the debates. Please refrain from making such comments in the future. Thanks, пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 21:38, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

It does not ask anyone to intervene on a certain side of the debate. It states my own personal opinion and invites people to add their own if they wish. --GHcool (talk) 21:41, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

No, you are clearly prejudicing the request for comment with statements such as "clumsily worded statement" and "he believes that the 9/11 attacks were good for Israel". A neutral intervention would have been along the lines of "There is currently a discussion on the inclusion of quotes by Bibi in article X. Please comment here." However, something like that should probably still be posted on both WP:Israel and WP:Palestine. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 21:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to word my requests more neutrally in the future. --GHcool (talk) 21:51, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 21:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Massacres

Please take notice of my comment here. Imad marie (talk) 09:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stalking

Reverting my edit in Operation Defensive Shield when you have no previous edit in the article makes me think of WP:STALK, be careful about that. Imad marie (talk) 09:20, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mufti's lead

Hi GHcool,
Yad Vashem is not a WP:RS for Mufti's antisemitism. Benny Morris is a better one. Yad Vashem is taken explicitely as exemple by Idith Zertal (who is a wp:rs) as exacerbing this picture... Whatever, per wp:npov, we cannot write that he was antisemite given the is no consensus among historians concerning this. See the section I recently wrote in the article concerning this.
For the remaining, I think it is better to have a "short" lead. I don't see the importance of anything more. There is currently in the lead an exemple that illustrates each of his main traits : nationalist - antiZionist - alleged antisemite due to his collaboration with Nazi.
I suggest we discuss this when Nishidani is back. We have both agreed to work on this article.
Regards,Ceedjee (talk) 17:53, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi again,

I am quite he asked indeed this to Nazi leaders (maybe to Eichmann and not Hitler; this must be checked).

In the lead, we don't have to source; we are assumed to take information from the core of the article.

Would you mind if we remove Mitchell G. Bard as a source... This is not a WP:RS ? (even if I have his book).

Regards, Ceedjee (talk) 19:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I think we should keep Bard as a source, but I've also just added this article as a source too. --GHcool (talk) 21:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi,

For historical articles, neither Bard nor the new source are wp:rs.

And there should be no references in the lead but this should only summarizes the core of the article.

Ceedjee (talk) 06:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request

GHCool, could you please e-mail me? Jayjg ^(talk) 00:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC)