User talk:Oren.tal/Archive Nov 2007

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Steven Weinstock

The article Steven Weinstock has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it did 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. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for 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. --Alabamaboy 11:03, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please

Please see my note at Talk:Jew Watch#Polemics. Thanks. ←Humus sapiens ну? 21:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR

You're likely to be blocked soon for violating our 3RR policy, which says that editors may not revert more than three times in 24 hours. Please review it carefully at WP:3RR. Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 22:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You have been blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule on Jew Watch. In the future, please solve editing disputes through discussion rather than edit warring. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Heimstern Läufer 23:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

This block is totally unjustified.I have been added a section and important one that show the criticisms of Jew watch and that have been erased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oren.tal (talk • contribs)

If you are really serious about participating in the project, may I suggest you spend some time learning about WP policies and improving your English (maybe get a spellchecker). ←Humus sapiens ну? 23:24, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
You were warned about the three-revert rule, and then you just went ahead and reverted anyway. If you'd stopped after being warned, I'd have been hesitant to block you; since you continued, I had no hesitation about it. Heimstern Läufer 23:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

The blocked have used has a weapons to force opinion of you on other. I will complain about your policy.You should not use in the block as a weapons to force opinion but only against vandalism.I have not erased any part of this article but just add an important information that you have erased.Shame on you.You should not be administrator at all.

  • Read WP:3RR until you understand it. Any of us would have been blocked for the same behaviour. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:43, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I mention true fact that the website quote the protocol and it was proved faked by the London time. Moreover you used the blocked as weapons in order to totally erase the criticisms.If you were honset you would have write your own version.but you did not. Instead you have used in blocking as a weapons.

  • Hi. I've blocked the accounts you created to evade the 3RR block you were serving. Please do not do that again. Thank you. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:43, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Moon God

Thanks for your note here where I have replied now. This moon god stuff is something which is really needed in Islam related articles. I'm sure there are many reliable sources that we can find for this. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 21:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Oren, thanks for your reply! Well yes, I also feel the moon god stuff should be mentioned. I mean the biggest thing is that Islam's symbol is the crescent moon. Criticism of Islam has been slow to seep into Wikipedia for many reasons, mostly because people wont agree with our viewpoints but slowly things are getting better. Just see if you can find a university professor, or a news website or a book that talks about this moon god stuff and then like other statements, just put it in and reference it like the others. People said that the bibleprobe.com is not a reliable source, they may be right. A reliable source is one that comes from established sources of information (see WP:RS for more info). The way you can go about this is, search e.g. "moon god islam" in Google and Google books or Scholars and you might find some sources talking about it. Let me know if you find a source that you think was reliable but was removed by other people. You'll find lots of people who might oppose your changes and then let me know and I'll support you if the source is pretty reliable. Just stay free from blocks, 3rr, personal attacks, sock puppets and use the article's talk page and you should be safe. I hope you can find a good RS now for that moon god stuff, that will be a great addition to Islam related articles. I'm sure someone has said something about it somewhere. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 00:57, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] soapboxing

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Criticism of the Qur'an are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. Please refrain from doing this in the future. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ITAQALLAH 21:37, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

please stop misusing talk pages to propagate your own personal viewpoints. see WP:NOT#FORUM, and WP:TPG. if you have any real suggestion concerning how to improve the article, you may do it without the spamming. ITAQALLAH 21:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
You are making the arguments yourself there. All we do is report on the arguments made by reliable sources. Arrow740 09:29, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] June 2007

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Criticism of the Qur'an. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. → AA (talk • contribs) — 16:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

No.I am not part of any edit war.I removed the link to wikipedia.However as for the other link they are fine.

[edit] WP:3RR Warning

You have already violated WP:3RR on Criticism of the Qur'an article. Please stop now. If you continue then I will report you and you might be blocked. regards. --- A. L. M. 16:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

  • More precisely, you will be blocked. Along with any other accounts you use in the process. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:45, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
I am only mention fact.Just because some people don't like those fact, it is not reason to block me.first check what I have written.
No. Read WP:3RR. Now. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
But I didn't revert it.I changed it and removed the link to the wikipedia article.It has also erased without any good reason.
OK, cease editing the Criticism of the Qur'an article for a period of 24 hours. If you revert again, you might be blocked. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 17:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Now you have made new accounts and editing from IP address too. Please give some source and we will accept your change. Do not misuse wikipedia. You are User:PaladinOfJesus and 132.72.149.74 Right. --- A. L. M. 14:36, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I have not made new account just haven't logged in and I am not User:PaladinOfJesus.

[edit] OR

Oren tal, I'm going to help you out here. Basically if your stuff is being reverted as OR, it means, you cant put in your own observations and inferences from something. It has to come from someone known, WP:RS and WP:OR apply. Do you see what I'm saying? Good attempt though. Stay in and let me know if you have questions. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 22:21, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What you added to Criticism of the Qur'an

I am struggling to figure out what the exact point of what you tried to add to the article. Prehaps if I knew exactly what you were trying to say, and where you got what from, I could rewrite it in a way that isn't WO:OR, and add it back in. It does seem to be somewhat sourced.--SefringleTalk 04:34, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

I have temporarily suspended your editing privileges to prevent further disruptive edit-warring at Criticism of the Qur'an. Tom Harrison Talk 15:24, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warnings

Do not remove administrative warnings from your talk page. Thank you. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 13:43, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

This is my page. What do you care if I remove it or not? there is no law in wikipedia that forbid me to delete it.That why I have the right to delete it. Just because you are administrator doesn't mean you are allowed to do anything. I want also to complain about your behavior. You have done injustice with me.Oren.tal 17:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Job

see Babylonian Talmud Baba Bathra 15b it states Seven prophets prophesied to the heathen, namely, Balaam and his father, Job, Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite, Zophar the Naamathite, and Elihu the son of Barachel the Buzite --Java7837 00:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Also don't tell me you are a former Jew your English is horrible and knew less about Judaism than an average Hindu living in Bombay. --Java7837 01:20, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I kow about Judaism much more than you.Oren.tal 11:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

You claim you were born in a Orthodox Jewish family so why would you leave Orthodox Judaism?

Are you an Atheist, Muslim, Christian, Pagan, Hindu, Buddhist, Karaite?

leave comments on the user talk page of Java7837

What caused you to lose faith in God? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.153.72.7 (talk) 01:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I was a reform Jew then atheist then I became an Orthodox Jew

leave comments on the user talk page of Java7837 --69.153.72.7 01:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

From what I have seen you seem to be editing articles criticizing Islam I can help a lot see Ezra_in_Islam#Jewish_perspective here I have shown why all scholars know that Muhammad is a big liar--69.153.72.7 01:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

leave comments on the user talk page of Java7837 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.153.72.7 (talk) 01:54, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

What do you need help on--69.153.72.7 02:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I have listed a couple verses that may be of interst to you User_talk:Java7837#Self_note

Here is the some strange verses

[5.51] O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.

[5.64] And the Jews say: The hand of Allah is tied up! Their hands shall be shackled and they shall be cursed for what they say. Nay, both His hands are spread out, He expends as He pleases; and what has been revealed to you from your Lord will certainly make many of them increase in inordinacy and unbelief; and We have put enmity and hatred among them till the day of resurrection; whenever they kindle a fire for war Allah puts it out, and they strive to make mischief in the land; and Allah does not love the mischief-makers.

[5.82] Certainly you will find the most violent of people in enmity for those who believe (to be) the Jews and those who are polytheists, and you will certainly find the nearest in friendship to those who believe (to be) those who say: We are Christians; this is because there are priests and monks among them and because they do not behave proudly.

--Java7837 02:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Also watch http://youtube.com/watch?v=cd5aA_kIDzY --Java7837 02:41, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Islam

Oren.tal, please stop this tendentious editing over at Islam. the material in the #Qur'an section is subject to community consensus and of featured quality. you have been altering it, inserting poorly written passages as well as your own POV skew. you are misusing sources (some of which are unreliable) to give the appearance of contradiction with- as well as misrepresentation of- what scholar Francis Peters says. i request you restore the consensus version in good faith and suggest your changes on talk for community feedback before making them. thank you. ITAQALLAH 17:00, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

that is talking about the Sana'a fragments discovered in 1972. Peters wrote in 1991 and later. if you try reading a little deeper about the Sana'a fragments you will realise that the differences were small (i.e. variant codices aka ahruf). nobody disputes that. i don't know why you are copy-pasting irrelevant quotes. ITAQALLAH 17:39, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Different versions of the Quran

I have read the fact before that even during the time of the third caliph there was several different qurans i do not have on hand have any books that discuss this topic though--Java7837 (talk) 04:24, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism of Islam wikiproject

I have proposed a new wikiproject and was thinking you might want to join Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Criticism_of_Islam --Java7837 (talk) 14:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Avijit Roy

stop putting articles for Avijit Roy, he is not reliable. (Imad marie (talk) 22:02, 20 January 2008 (UTC))

Please explain to me how is it that Avijit Roy is reliable (Imad marie (talk) 22:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC))

what make him not reliable.He is free thinker and explain the issue throw rational way.Second it is far more reliable than all your source that are Islamic web site and for that issue are not neutral or reliable.This all article will be removed before removing Avijit.Oren.tal (talk) 22:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Oren, we should apply the policy uniformly. Avijit is not a reliable source or mukto mona and other Islamic sites are also not reliable. Take them out where you see them. Good work you did on taking out those dawah sites. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 03:49, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Najjar Link

I'm not sure if you are trying to be funny or you are serious when you are calling Najjar link a dangerous link. If you are serious you have to prove that for administrators. (Imad marie (talk) 08:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC))

Firefox extensions are not a wikipedia measurement for good links, please do not remove the link again or you will be reported (Imad marie 20:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Imad marie (talk • contribs)

[edit] Is Najjar a reliable reference?

You are invited to participate here (Imad marie (talk) 07:08, 25 January 2008 (UTC))

[edit] English Language

Please make sure that your contributions and comments are written in good English so that other editors can understand you. (Imad marie (talk) 15:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC))

[edit] Off-wiki canvassing

Oren.tal, I have posted this on Talk:Islam as well, but I suggest you read WP:MEAT, and reconsider the off-wiki canvassing you have been conducting in order to enforce changes on articles that you are editing, like Islam ([1], [2]) and Qur'an and miracles ([3]). Please be aware that if this behaviour continues, you are likely to be blocked. ITAQALLAH 20:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

There is no behavior.I don't need to supply any explanation to you and I suggest you will refrain from accusing me.
I'm not requesting an explanation, I'm requesting you not do this in the future. ITAQALLAH 19:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok, Itaqallah, how do you know it is Oren.tal? Yahel Guhan 03:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
So you don't believe that Oren.tal's edits on 31 Jan at 12:10pm on Qur'an and miracles correspond with his forum post dated 31 Jan, 12:18pm in which he campaigns about the same issues on the very same article (posting under the name "Secularist")?
Or don't you believe that Oren.tal's on-wiki support of NineBerry (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) here on 8 Jan at 3:26pm ("I am totally agree") corresponds to Oren.tal's off-wiki support of NineBerry here on 8 Jan at 3:34pm ("I saw you write it in the discussion in wikipedia. I agree. I think you are very right and that should be the accurate sentence.")?
There's a large number of giveaways, not least the generally semi-coherent English and consistent peculiarities in phrasing and language, or his editing on patterns on Islam which I am sure anyone familiar with Oren.tal's edits on that article will note. ITAQALLAH 19:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
it is not me.Oren.tal (talk) 19:48, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
I remain unconvinced. It could be any number of people who just read the article (wikipedian or not) for whom English is a second language. There are plenty of people who read wikipedia articles and complain about its bias who never edit the articles. The correspondence is very weak, and really doesn't really prove a connection. Yahel Guhan 06:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
You are incorrect: the poster makes quite clear that he edits on Wikipedia, that he is actively editing these articles and that he needs help in enforcing his changes ("I tried to change it but there are many Muslims there that turn it...", "So I ask help from people to remove this wrong sentence.I will appreciates every help."). It corresponds with the articles Oren.tal was editing, at the time he was editing them (see above), and involves the specific disputes Oren.tal himself was involved in. Oren.tal was the sole editor trying to enforce the change on Islam, and he notes that in his forum message too ("But the problem is that I was alone in this issue."). It also corresponds directly with Oren.tal's off wiki solicitation of Nineberry, Nineberry's on-wiki intervention and talk message, Oren.tal's on-wiki agreement (at 3:26pm) and immediate off-wiki thanks for Nineberry's intervention (at 3:34pm).
I really don't believe you should present yourself as an impartial adjudicator here given our history. If you want to contest my warning to Oren.tal in spite of the substantial evidence, then feel free to take it to AN. ITAQALLAH 15:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
He don't need to be part of it.Anyway it was not me and the people raise their points.who ever that one that edit before I don't care who he is.Oren.tal (talk) 21:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:3RR

Please mind that. --Be happy!! (talk) 03:04, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Please self-revert. I have no interests in reporting you. Thanks --Be happy!! (talk) 03:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
I have no idea what are you talking about.Oren.tal (talk) 19:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] external links

WP:EL says: Avoid undue weight on particular points of view, read the policy well (Imad marie (talk) 15:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC))

[edit] Blocked

You have been blocked for a period of thirty-six hours for edit-warring on Qur'an and miracles. To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. -- tariqabjotu 21:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

There is no reason for this blocking and it is unfair.I have only insert my edit after Imad insist to enter his edit.I was fine with no links but since he insert his links then I insert my.Note that he himself revert more than three time.

[edit] Idle threats

Please don't make idle threats.

Either report me or shut up. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 23:15, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Relax with the way you speak because I will report that also.Oren.tal (talk) 23:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
If you don't like my tone, stop threatening me. Put up or shut up. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 23:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I don't threaten you,I give you warning but I will report you.You have really arrogance to come here and to repeat your way.Oren.tal (talk) 23:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Please do. Or stop making idle threats. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 23:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I will do it and I will report you for spamming my channel.Now don't write any comment any more in my channel.Now I wont even talk to you but will just report you for spamming.Oren.tal (talk) 23:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
You don't own your user page, and I'll respond to your threats if I'd like. I will tell you one more time: Report me or stop threatening me. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 00:04, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I did NOT threat you.I gave you warning and I am going to report your spamming.I ask not to spam my page but you decided to do it anyway.You have no right to do it and I am going to report you now.Oren.tal (talk) 00:06, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I have just reported you for spamming.You have no right to spam my page and I have asked you not to spam.Oren.tal (talk) 00:11, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Regarding this: I suggest taking a couple of deep breaths, reading through relevant policies (especially WP:CITE, WP:AGF, WP:UP, WP:CIV, WP:NLT, etc.) and cool down. If you still feel bad in a couple of days time, report this to WP:WQA, or possibly to WP:RFC. OK? —Gabbe (talk) 14:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Qur'an and science

Are you convinced about the edits you do? or you just want to object to what any "Muslim" editor does??? Explain to me, in good English, and in a logical way, why is Muhammed being illiterate is relative to the section that says that Qur'an is miraculous in its nature so that no human can write it (regardless if this human was illiterate or not). I remind you, use good English so that I can understand you... (Imad marie (talk) 05:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC))