Revision as of 01:21, 19 October 2008 editCoppertwig (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers17,281 edits →Comment on deletion: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:53, 19 October 2008 edit undoCJCurrie (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators75,062 editsm →Comment on deletionNext edit → | ||
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
<small>Re edit: I don't understand how you think that's misleading. I don't think there's a consensus that it's a personal attack; and I don't think consensus supports deleting mild personal attacks against oneself. See ]; ''"On other talk pages, especially where such text ''is directed against you'', removal should typically be limited."'' (]); ''It is not normally appropriate to edit or remove another editor's comment.'' (]).</small> Cheers, <span style="color:Red; font-size:1.5em;">☺</span> ] (]) 01:21, 19 October 2008 (UTC) | <small>Re edit: I don't understand how you think that's misleading. I don't think there's a consensus that it's a personal attack; and I don't think consensus supports deleting mild personal attacks against oneself. See ]; ''"On other talk pages, especially where such text ''is directed against you'', removal should typically be limited."'' (]); ''It is not normally appropriate to edit or remove another editor's comment.'' (]).</small> Cheers, <span style="color:Red; font-size:1.5em;">☺</span> ] (]) 01:21, 19 October 2008 (UTC) | ||
:Blackworm claims that a comment I made a year and a half ago is how I "really" feel about a current issue. That's an abusive misuse of my statements, and in any event is a personal comment having nothing whatsoever to do with article content. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 01:24, 19 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
::Thank you for the explanation. Now I understand why you consider it misleading. I agree that a comment from so long ago can't necessarily be assumed to represent your current position. I also agree that it's a personal comment not directly related to article content. May I suggest discussing it politely with Blackworm on his talk page? I'm willing to act as a sort-of mediator. <span style="color:Purple; font-size:1.5em;">☺</span> ] (]) 01:32, 19 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::Do you agree with its removal? ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 01:54, 19 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
::::Having just offered to act in a mediator-like role I'm not sure if I should answer that. I'm not claiming to be in a state of total neutrality but may be able to exhibit a facsimile thereof. <span style="color:Purple; font-size:1.5em;">☺</span> ] (]) 02:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
::::I suggest that you try to see the situation from Blackworm's POV: to try to imagine what it was like going through the sequence of events from his perspective, and to see if you can imagine how he might have been feeling to react the way he did. See also ]. <span style="color:Red; font-size:1.5em;">☺</span> ] (]) 15:45, 19 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
==]== | |||
You are in violation of the ]. Please self-revert now, or you will be reported. ] (]) 21:53, 19 October 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:53, 19 October 2008
This is a subpage of Jayjg's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Thanks for visiting my Talk: page.
If you are considering posting something to me, please: *Post new messages to the bottom of my talk page.
Comments which fail to follow the four rules above may be immediately archived or deleted. Thanks again for visiting. |
Archives |
no archives yet (create) |
This page has archives. Sections older than 8 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
RFA Thanks
Jayjg, I'd like to thank you for voting in my RFA. Thanks also for expressing your trust in me, and I hope that I live up to your expectations. Don't forget, if you have any questions (or bits of advice), please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks again, Spencer 02:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Are you able to help?
Hey there, and thanks again for your comment on my talk page about Stonewall riots. Some weeks ago, an anonymous edit was inserted into the Harvey Milk article regarding his grandfather's involvement in three Long Island, NY synagogues. We removed them because the information was dubiously cited. I just got off the phone with Harvey's nephew who said it was his brother who was trying to add the information. So I wanted verification that Morris Milk was involved in establishing three Long Island synagogues. I don't know where to look for that. I was hoping with your experience in the Jewish congregation articles you knew of some resources that could verify that. Milk's nephew will be sending me the names of the congregations, but that's all I have to go on for now. Let me know. Thanks! --Moni3 (talk) 18:24, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
- After doing some searching, Morris Milk's NYT obituary says he started Woodmere Congregation Sons of Israel in Woodmere, NY. Harvey's biographer says he started Beth Israel. I, uh, feel like a dolt because I don't know if that's the same thing or not. --Moni3 (talk) 20:18, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
- Hey. I'll answer you here - I'm watching your page. Harvey's nephew says that Morris Milk was involved in organizing B'Nai Sholom in Rockville Centre, the Sons Of Israel in Woodmere, and Moses David, all on Long Island, but the Sons of David is no longer active. I wrote to the 5 Towns Jewish Times, hoping they might have print sources confirming this, and they gave me a rabbi's name and number to call. I'll do that Monday I suppose. I have access to a university library (that appears to have a significant store of Jewish resources), but since I've never worked on Jewish topics, I don't know the names of newspapers or publications to look for. Any ideas? --Moni3 (talk) 01:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
RfA thanks
Hello Jayjg. Thank you very much for your support in my recent Request for Adminship, which was successful with 111 supports, 0 opposes, and 0 neutral. I have to say I am more than a little overwhelmed by this result and I greatly appreciate your trust in me. I will do my best to use the tools wisely. Thanks again. Regards. Thingg 01:36, 12 October 2008 (UTC) |
Your question on WP:AE
Jayjg, I read your question in the thread about John, and will respond to it here if you don't mind, because I am hoping someone will archive that thread so it is no longer an albatross for John. I've been keeping an eye on the Mantanmoreland related pages since shortly before the arbcom case closed, and Naked short selling for some time before that. They're the only pages on my watchlist where AGF isn't the rule of thumb; given the history, the reason is obvious. During the intervening months, I have occasionally forwarded some usernames to either checkuser-L or directly to one or more checkusers for their review. I've done that sub rosa because I don't want to mark an editor unnecessarily with the taint of alleged sockpuppetry. Only once have I posted an on-wiki request for CU of an account related to these articles. I operated on the theory that anyone who had been editing the articles before the close of the arbcom case was very unlikely to be a sockpuppet, and John had indeed been working on them for some time. I saw no reason to consider him a sock of anyone, and was not aware that his current account had started off as an alternate account; even if I had been aware, I would have been more inclined to email him and ask quietly what the current situation was. I know there are other admins (and possibly even arbitrators) watching those pages, mainly because other admins have taken action on them from time to time, but I don't recall ever having an off-wiki discussion with anyone specifically about these pages. One or two editors, yes, but not John. Can we maybe let that thread close so that it doesn't continue to hang over his head? Risker (talk) 03:35, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you
I appreciate your support in my RfA. Hope you had a nice High Holiday season, and best of luck with your massive project. Kindly, Lazulilasher (talk) 00:04, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Circumcision
Re the 6th sentence here (beginning "You have..."): I've been asking Blackworm not to say things about other editors, so I feel that I must (hereby) give you the same message. Regards, ☺ Coppertwig (talk) 14:54, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Shapiro Source
I happen to have access to Messianic Judaism: A Rabbi's Journey Through Religious Change in America through a friend. Can you care to cite which exact page the quote you are posting is from since I do not find it on page 1 as is sourced in your cite. In fact, upon review of your "source" for "Christian funded and organized movement," the source you cited does not state such at all - anywhere - at all. Please review your source, and post proof verifying the quote, or remove your unsourced edit. Thank you. inigmatus (talk) 05:31, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Agudath Israel Etz Ahayem
Once again, please stop revising the[REDACTED] page on the montgomery synagogue. I have kindly asked several times. While you may feel several sections are relevant, others do not. Please try and respect the wishes of the actual members of that synagogue. I will say again, please stop revising our[REDACTED] page. Feel free to respond with any questions or comments. I welcome them. You may be interested to view the website, agudathmontgomery.com. This website makes no mention of the several sections you deem important. Finally, for the life of me, I do not understand how you, an administrator no less, can intervene on this page so many times. Please try and communicate to me why you do so and exactly what your credentials are to make such a decision. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.76.187.142 (talk) 01:48, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Please understand that you do not WP:OWN the article on the synagogue, that the standards for the synagogue's website are not those of Misplaced Pages, and that removing properly sourced, relevant information is considered vandalism. If you continue to delete this information I will be forced to protect the page. If you have issues with article content, please raise them on the article Talk: page. Jayjg 00:40, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Comment on deletion
Re this edit: I don't understand how you think that's misleading. I don't think there's a consensus that it's a personal attack; and I don't think consensus supports deleting mild personal attacks against oneself. See WP:Talk#Others' comments; "On other talk pages, especially where such text is directed against you, removal should typically be limited." (Misplaced Pages:No personal attacks#Removal of text); It is not normally appropriate to edit or remove another editor's comment. (Misplaced Pages:Civility#Removal of uncivil comments). Cheers, ☺ Coppertwig (talk) 01:21, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
- Blackworm claims that a comment I made a year and a half ago is how I "really" feel about a current issue. That's an abusive misuse of my statements, and in any event is a personal comment having nothing whatsoever to do with article content. Jayjg 01:24, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for the explanation. Now I understand why you consider it misleading. I agree that a comment from so long ago can't necessarily be assumed to represent your current position. I also agree that it's a personal comment not directly related to article content. May I suggest discussing it politely with Blackworm on his talk page? I'm willing to act as a sort-of mediator. ☺ Coppertwig (talk) 01:32, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
- Do you agree with its removal? Jayjg 01:54, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
- Having just offered to act in a mediator-like role I'm not sure if I should answer that. I'm not claiming to be in a state of total neutrality but may be able to exhibit a facsimile thereof. ☺ Coppertwig (talk) 02:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
- I suggest that you try to see the situation from Blackworm's POV: to try to imagine what it was like going through the sequence of events from his perspective, and to see if you can imagine how he might have been feeling to react the way he did. See also User:Coppertwig/NPOV#Respecting others' opinions. ☺ Coppertwig (talk) 15:45, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
- Do you agree with its removal? Jayjg 01:54, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for the explanation. Now I understand why you consider it misleading. I agree that a comment from so long ago can't necessarily be assumed to represent your current position. I also agree that it's a personal comment not directly related to article content. May I suggest discussing it politely with Blackworm on his talk page? I'm willing to act as a sort-of mediator. ☺ Coppertwig (talk) 01:32, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Anti-Zionism
You are in violation of the 3RR. Please self-revert now, or you will be reported. CJCurrie (talk) 21:53, 19 October 2008 (UTC)