User talk:Malik Shabazz/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archive 1 Archive 2 →

Contents

Velvet Underground timeline

Hello Malik Shabazz, I just saw your argument to delete the Velvet Underground timeline. I have different views, and I would like to invite you to react on them. Thanks, Curt Woyte 09:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

curious

would I know you from no-more-songs? Tvoz | talk 00:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Almost certainly. I'm a member of n-m-s. Malik Shabazz 01:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Figured as much. I haven't been reading it regularly of late - sometimes the discussions get so tedious that I can't take it. The best for me are the sightings usually. But I still get it, and sometimes do a marathon read - you may have seen me post there from time to time. I put a fair amount of work into the Ochs wiki page a few months ago and since then have been mostly watching for vandals there while getting beat up (but still standing) on some other pages (see Talk: Kent State shootings for example, if you're interested and feel free to jump in...) and working on a bunch of other stuff like Obama, and a variety of Beatles pages with the most enjoyable group of editors I've encountered on Wikipedia, and lots of other stuff. Anyway, Ochs is much more comprehensive now than it was, and I'm pretty pleased with it - but it can always use more. Add to it! 06:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Ok, just realized who you are. Yup, I certainly have seen you on n-m-s, a lot. Cheers. 06:18, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Actuary

Hello, Malik! image:smile.png -- Avi 01:16, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I am glad you don't think actuarial science and political science are not sciences. How do I remove those science lables or does the word science appended at the end of a term like creation science mean that it is not science becaue a real scuinec does not need to announce it self to the world as science? like mr Avi who keeps trying to say that removal of the science from actiuarial science is noit right? Who is right? What counts? Is it the correct policy to either point out or not point out that say creation science is not science? Chivista 20:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Noah Fleiss

I know it'll be difficult, but we still need a source. Maybe eventually he'll do an interview? Maybe there is something out there. I do understand it will be hard to find. -FateSmiled&DestinyLaughed 22:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Szmul Zygielbojm.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Szmul Zygielbojm.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:13, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to Malcolm X

Quote: Hi. I noticed that you added the following sentence to the article about Malcolm X:

The surname of 'Little' was actually given to Earl by his slave masters while he was younger, therefore his true given surname is actually unknown.

I have two questions. First, had Earl Little been enslaved? (I don't think the Autobiography says so, but maybe some other source does.) If not, he inherited the name "Little" from an enslaved ancestor, and you might want to tighten up the sentence to say that. Second, I've done some editing of the slave name article, and I want to edit the Malcolm X article but I haven't had the time. If Earl Little wasn't enslaved himself, you might want to refer to "Little" as his (or Malcolm X's) "slave name" and link to that article.

Also, if you'd like to, please help improve the slave name article. Malik Shabazz 22:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC) Unquote.

Malik...duely noted. I am not entirely sure whether Earl himself was enslaved or his ancestors and unfortunately I cannot site where that information came from. I believe I heard it in a documentary clip with Malcolm himself, but cannot be certain. I will research and update accordingly upon my findings. Thank you for questioning. --Usually Right 20:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

CCA

There was an article that was deleted for lack of notability. By adding the 1100 figure, I hope that shows that the conference is not so unnotable. I would suggest you add some references as to the importance of the CCA, preferably from sources other than the CCA itself. -- Avi 15:34, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for alerting me to the actual content of that message re Malcolm X. The heading for the template I used used to be accurate, I hope (otherwise I messed up before). It says "may be considered vandalism" but the actual message says "is vandalism." I did want the contributor to think about what effect filling in the blanks on what was pretty obviously an "official document" could do to the process of getting these articles evaluated. I assume that some kind of a task force is responsible for grading articles according to some predetermined standards. If they are looking around for articles to evaluate and the evaluation is already filled in they may fail to realize that it is not work that was done by somebody entitled to do that task. One article wouldn't make much difference in the long run, but what if the user makes a practice of grading ungraded articles? I fixed the contributor's talk page. P0M 07:37, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I just noticed the discussion about Malcolm X's father. I never read anything that said that his father was a grandfatherly 60+ years old or so when he was conceived. (1925-1865=60) So it's questionable that his father could have been born a slave. P0M 07:53, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Regarding edits made to Gary Coleman

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Malik Shabazz! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bmembers\.tripod\.com\/.+, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 20:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Israeli Newspaper

Thank you for that helpful bit of information, Malik! Noogster 23:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

USN&WR

Nice find, Malik! image:smile.png -- Avi 01:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Editing John Amaechi

You contacted me about my posts and edits. Thank you. My source was John Amaechi's interview on WNYC here in New York; I added that at the bottom of the article. I'm not yet facile with Wikipedia's capacities, so I'm usually doing the minimum of typing words, without using everything to note, reference, highlight, and so on.

Reading your user page, we have many of the same interests and I would appreciate corresponding with you.

Thank you again, BigGuy

Re: Hidden in Plain View

If there is an article about the actual book titled Hidden in Plain View, then it should be created at Hidden in Plain View (book), or better Hidden in Plain View: A Secret Story of Quilts and the Underground Railroad, and then an "otheruses" line within Hidden in Plain View would be more than appropriate, as well as possibly creating Hidden in Plain View (disambiguation). However, as long as there is no article about the book itself (and if there is no intention of creating one), there are different options: The best would be a disambiguation page mentioning the book, with a link to it atop the Hidden in Plain View article. Another option would be a whole section specifically about the book within the Quilts of the Underground Railroad, preferrably titled "Hidden in Plain View: A Secret Story of Quilts and the Underground Railroad" with the "otheruses" tag I reverted linking to this section. Hope this helps. --HarryCane 18:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Forgotten Hebrew

I hope you don't mind that I borrowed your "forgotten Hebrew" userbox; I was looking for something exactly like it. Would you consider linking to it somewhere more prominent? Kevinsam 07:22, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of unattributed information

Hi Malik. If I deleted all the unattributed or poorly attributed information on Wikipedia, there'd only be 10% left. It's better to have something unsourced than improperly sourced; once you stick an improper source on something, it gives it a false semblance of legitimacy. Also, standards used to be different on Wikipedia, and for the first couple of years almost nothing was attributed; rather than fixing all the errors of the past, I generally try to make sure new dubious material doesn't get in, so at least the problem doesn't get any worse. Jayjg (talk) 19:27, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, as I said before, it's the improperly attributed information that is the most dangerous, because it gives the semblance of being true. Also, I don't necessarily read through the whole article each time, but my attention does get focussed on the area that was brought to attention via the improper attribution. And, frankly, some stuff in an article I find to be plausible, even if unsourced, while other stuff I find to be implausible, and I would be likely to delete the latter. I sometimes do delete old stuff from articles that looks implausible as well, even if it is not tagged; I've gotten some mighty objections to that as well, including in the last couple of days. Jayjg (talk) 20:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

You're probably right

But it's always worth a shot anyway. Tiamut 20:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

self-hatred

Hi,

I would be grateful if you would take a look at the conflict at self-hatred. I see that you have been updating and sourcing the information about the controversial uses of the term self-hating Jew. I tried to include a one-sentence summary of that info in the "controversial uses" section of the article on self-hatred, because I think such a summary belongs there. Maybe I somehow got it wrong (I would appreciate your opinion about that), but it all ended up in an edit war with User:Jayjg and User:Slim Virgin, who apparently feel there is no controversy at all, and see no controversy reported in the article self-hating Jew. They also consider my attempt at summarizing to be original research. If you agree with them that my summary is incorrect, perhaps you would like to include your own? Regards, --91.148.159.4 00:00, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it and try to help if I can. — Malik Shabazz | Talk 00:02, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Article on editions of the masoretic Bible

Hi Malik.

First of all, I just wanted to say that I have been following your expansion of the article on Jewish Bible translations, and I think what you have done is exceptional. When I started the article over a year ago, I hoped it could turn into something more than just a list, namely an article that would describe different the different styles and methodologies of the various translations, their historical contexts, etc. You have added a lot of good material in that direction, with a very good sense of judgement.

I have been thinking about starting another article, this time on printed Hebrew editions of the masoretic text. I have a great deal of primary and secondary material on the topic that can be used for sourcing (much more so than I had for translations). The scope of the article would be notable printed editions that had significant influence on the details of the received text, or made significant contributions to accuracy. Various editorial methodologies for transcribing and printing masoretic details would be described, as well as other unique features of important editions of the Hebrew text. This would exclude photo reprints (which might at most be mentioned in footnotes when they are particularly significant).

I am still undecided about two things:

  • Should the article also include important masoretic manuscripts, or should that be a second article? (In any case it would not include old Torah scrolls or megillot, which were influenced by the masoretic manuscripts but usually not vice versa, and contain only the letter-text.)
  • How should the article be titled? Masoretic Bibles is accurate but makes no distiction between manuscript and printed editions. Editions of the Tanakh is less weildy, and might be thought to include translations, etc.

Do you have any other ideas about the above questions? And would you be interested in collaborating on the article? Dovi 07:08, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Sources provided may just make the grade

Thanks MalikShabazz! Did you notice how he says this occurred in the area bounded by "Yibna, An Nabi Rubin, and Khribet Sukreir, the camping grounds of the Bedouin tribes of Arab Sukreir"? [1] Do you think this could be a match with the name "Suqrir"? Its consistent on the Givati Brigade as the responsible party and the number of civilians killed. Iw ish we could get a copy of Khalidi's book. I'll try to do that on amazon too. Thanks again and I hereby award you the

The Barnstar of Diligence
for pursuing accuracy and fairness in sourcing, and doing it all keen perceptivity and kindness at the same timeTiamut 18:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
By the way, this is the internet source for all that info: [2] I'm not using it as a source because of the disclaimer at the top of the page saying this is research in progress. But it might be useful to prusuing further leads to books, if you are interested. Tiamut 18:18, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Gary Coleman

I am very disappointed with your editing of Gary Coleman's appearance at lan centers. He has been a fixture in the gaming community, and it is not a pleasure to see someone from outside the community tampering with things that he knows nothing about. Sincerely, Joel.

Jewish divisions

Let me know if I overwrote anything of yours. I moved the hasidic section up one notch, into the "jewish cultural and ethic" background section. Tahnk you for working on it! It is surely part of the background to understanding the modern divisions. I am focusing on organizing future sections of the article, on the historical development of the movements, and on the differences between them. --Metzenberg 02:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Can you suggest a good Orthodox commentator for the section, "Response to pressures of assimilation"? --Metzenberg 03:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I am tentatively planning to participate in the 2007 DC Jewish Environmental Bike Ride on April 22, 2007. You might be interested! Even if you cannot ride, or are not a rider, you might enjoy the Shabbat retreat. Check it out. http://www.hazon.org/ I am an avid cyclist, and I am involved in forming a Jewish bicycling organization. --Metzenberg 03:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Tim Hardaway

You're quite welcome! It is only a start, however. Ideally, I'd like to see no more than two paragraphs devoted to this "controversy", which is really not germaine to his career. There is a good deal more cutting to do. I just don't want to "rock the boat" too much too quickly! May I hand you a cleaver? Cleo123 00:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the Michael Richards Laugh Factory incident section is a good example of a similar controversial incident that has been successfully pruned back. Not, of course, without much dispute! LOL! Cleo123 00:38, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

The genuine ARC website

Malik, the hyhenated version of the URL is a countefeit website please see whois.net for dates, and validation of this fact from both URL's. The genuine ARC website can ONLY BE FOUND at deathcamps.org and the folks there will have no issue with you using/posting the photo.

Thank you and we appreciate your understanding in this matter. ARC info@deathcamps.org

The above claims are incorrect. Details are on my user page. --Sergey Romanov 13:24, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Both death-camps.org and deathcamps.org links are being blacklisted and deleted due to copyright concerns and complaints to the Foundation.[3] I'm one of several people going around disabling these links on a rush basis. --A. B. (talk) 00:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Bessie Smith

Thank you, Malik, for your diligent work in keeping up with vandalizers and mis-informants. Having spent to many years researching Bessie for my biography, I may well be overly proprietary, but the Census information (eleven children, mulattos, etc.) that someone keeps adding is very suspect. The information may well be there and, if so, I think it should be mentioned, but also questioned. I spoke to the few relatives who were still around 45 years ago and there was no mention of siblings (Mulatto or otherwise) other than the ones I mention in my book.

I wonder why Bessie is so regularly a victim of vandalism.

Christiern Albertson 16:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Union of Progressive Zionists

A tag has been placed on Union of Progressive Zionists, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (below the existing db tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Leuko 04:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Could you review these articles?

I see you are also interested in Natan Slifkin. Please review these articles, because I have run up against an intransigent editor:

Perhaps you could also review the changes the same editor has made to Natan Slifkin. He does not come from the Jewish perspective, and he seems to be following me around and looking for ways to harass me. --Metzenberg 04:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Farband

Hello, yes I went to Moshava, so I suppose we have some common history there. Around when did you go to Na'aleh? It just reopened recently and seems to be doing fairly well. As for the V v. W, in English transliteration of Yiddish it is common practice to use the W for the double vav, since the double vav was used as an approximation of the German W, which is pronounced as a V sound. The letter V is used for a different sound in transliteration, closer to F. A good example is here with the word Forward in English, Yiddish, and Yiddish transliterated into the Latin alphabet: Forward

As for the Farband, I don't actually have any personal connection to them, but was doing some research and decided to put up what I know. Redzuny 21:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Gun Control Act of 1968

Hi Malik. I'd love to get your take on the "Controversy" section at Gun Control Act of 1968. There is a long argument there from Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. I personally think this is an extremist group, but your take might be valuable. MiFeinberg 22:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, friend. MiFeinberg 00:39, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Ralph Nader

Hi Malik Shabazz, you are invited to discuss the Atlantic Monthly issue on the Nader Talk page. Thanks. Telogen 07:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Alexander Berkman

Hey, I'm stealing your Alexander Berkman userbox, it's fantastic! Murderbike 19:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Phil

Hi! Great about Camp Favorites - would love to hear that one. I think your template is excellent - my only suggestion is that it's not immediately apparent that the compilations are also posthumous - maybe center a heading or add a rule or separation above posthumous to indicate that all of the ones that follow are that - but otherwise at first look I think it's a great addition. Love your userboxes too - where/when in the Bronx? I'm born and raised Amalgamated Tvoz |talk 06:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Columbia University

Greetings, fellow Columbian. I just created a WikiProject dedicated to Columbia University, the schools, environs, and the notable people who notably affiliated with it. If you want to be part of it, please check out WP:Columbia. It is very barebones right now, but with your help we can expand it and make it fully functional. If you have any questions please drop my a line on my talk page. --Valley2city₪‽ 08:01, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Criticism of Conservative Judaism

Suggest being WP:BOLD and going ahead and change the wording of the introduction to make its tone more WP:NPOV. See my comment on Talk:Criticism of Conservative Judaism. Best, --Shirahadasha 03:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)