Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:29, 30 December 2006

Archives

/Archive1

Re: What's up?

Hey!! Welcome back!!

I am good. I hope everything is going well with you. So glad that you're back again. How is everything going with you?

I am recently involved in a couple of articles such as criticism of the Quran, antisemitism and I have a hard time with some editors. But that's wiki-life. Anyways, Nice to see you around. --Aminz 03:10, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Who is Jacob Peters

I noticed that you and User:Jacob Peters have been having a discussion on Talk:Joseph Stalin in which Jacob Peters was desperately trying to prove that Joseph Stalin was not a dictator. I'm a part of the Misplaced Pages Israel Project and Jacob Peters has been spreading disinformation on our articles as well. He tried unsuccessfully to prove that Hezbollah does not target civilians calling the allegation that they do "a deranged Zionist POV which flagrantly violates Misplaced Pages's NPOV policy" (Talk:Hezbollah/Archive 8). If you read the archived talk page, you'll notice the same kind of Alice in Wonderland logic that he uses on the Joseph Stalin talk page. Jacob Peters later claims that "'northern Israel' was in fact part of the Arab state in the ... 1947 UN Partition. If Hizballah wants to, they can fire rockets on what is rightful Palestinian territory under Zionist occupation" (Talk:Hezbollah/Archive 8). As any reasonable person can see, this is not only a lie, but also a contradiction of his earlier claim that Hezbollah does not target civilians. I thought you'd like to know. --GHcool 21:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks... this guy may or may not be a sockmaster as well, he sure seems to argue in a similar matter to a user called Kiske and other users as well. There can't be THAT many pro-Stalinists around, can there? - Merzbow 03:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

In case you ware interested to know, Jacob Peters has been repeatedly blocked for sockpuppeting . But I don't think that he and Kiske are same person(I can be wrong about this of course)--Staberinde 12:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Sources

You might be the only one participating in these discussions dispassionately. Though I take issue with some of the things you've said, I hope you don't give up. I'd rather argue with someone being thoughtful than otherwise. Arrow740 03:41, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! - Merzbow 03:44, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Why do you think faithfreedom is extremist? Arrow740 10:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Using Nazi comparisons, and I remember him saying on his site that Islam should explicitly be banned. - Merzbow 22:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Merzbow

Merzbow, I wanted to thank you for finally compromising and allowing us both to come to a desicion that would satisfy all of us. I want to say that I admire your dedication to this encylopedia and that I am terribly sorry of the personal attacks I made against you earlier. They were wrong, I should not have lost my temper, but I am truly satisfied that we have reached a desicion. I also wanted to tell you that even though we might have deferring views and opinions, in the end we are all "playing for the same team", as they say in America, the Misplaced Pages team, and we are all working to make it better and inform the people of the world. And just so you are sure, I am not Jacob Peters, I have never spoken to him and do not know who he is, but I am not him. I noticed you were questioning whether we were the same person on this very talk page, but check the IP numbers, we are not... there are many pro-stalinists and pro-communists around, but I do not want to get into those issues again. Thank you once again, and good luck. Kiske 10:31, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Don't worry about the earlier stuff. Misplaced Pages is a rewarding but sometimes stress-inducing hobby. In the end, it all probably doesn't matter as much as we think it does. - Merzbow 20:34, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Sura like it -website

I dont agree with your decision to take out the site. What would make this website reliable enough to be included? What policy of WP is this website not following? For that matter there are 100's of other websites not reliable too and they are included in refs all the time. --Matt57 00:28, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:RS, see the "Self-published sources" section. This is a guideline, not a policy, which means it should be applied as appropriate for the type of article being talked about. For example, one isn't going to require articles on Pokemon to be sourced only to university professors. However, I think there is enough higher-quality criticism available for the Islam articles that we can easily do without websites like that sura one. - Merzbow 01:23, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks very much for the Barnstar. It was very kind of you. I hope everything is going well with you. --Aminz 23:43, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Your outside view on RfC

I didn't mean to ignore it, and may well endorse it, though perhaps with some qualifications, as you've referenced many points of detail. I'll take a closer look tonight.Proabivouac 22:51, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Another JP sock

Iskra1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) seems to be a new and fairly obvious JP sock (unwillingness to sign talk page comments is a dead giveaway). - Merzbow 22:47, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I have filed a request for checkuser (see Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser#Jacob_Peters). I would like to note that not signing talk pages is not really a dead giveaway; many new users don't do that. -- tariqabjotu 23:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Dhimmitude

Hi Merzbow,

Can you please help with that article. I would like to add this to intro .

My argument is that WP:Lead says: "The lead should be capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article, establishing context, explaining why the subject is interesting or notable, and describing its notable controversies, if there are any."

Thanks --Aminz 03:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I opened a voting on Talk:Dhimmitude. Please join in. --Aminz 03:30, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, looks complicated. I'll take a look. - Merzbow 04:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the voting. But I am not sure if an opposing view exists. Please have a look at The Oxford Handbook of Jewish Studies, p.198, 2002, Oxford University Press (at books.google.com)

It criticizes Bat Ye'or for her exaggerations. Cheers, --Aminz 04:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

The disagreement between Lewis and others that we should express in the intro is about the meaning of the word 'dhimmitude', not about how dhimmis were treated. Although I think Lewis is more correct about the actual state of dhimmis, I think Spencer and Ye'or are more correct about what is meant when people say dhimmitude - inequality rather than persecution. - Merzbow 05:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

So, why did Lewis actually used the word "Dhimmitude"? Thanks for the suggestion BTW. --Aminz 05:32, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

In the full Lewis quote he basically says that he thinks 'dhimmitude' refers to a state of "subservience and persecution and ill treatment", then he claims that state is was a myth. To him, the term refers to a state that didn't really exist, so in effect he's saying it's not a valid term. Hmm, now that I read the quotes more closely, I think Ye'or and Spencer actually place different emphases on the term between themselves. - Merzbow 05:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Existence of dispute in Antisemitism article

Hi Merzbow,

Hope everything is going well and Happy New Year!! It's again me :P

Some editors are disputing the very existence of a dispute on the Antisemitism article. Would you please have at the evidence provided here and see if that testifies existence of some dispute over the neutrality of the article. Thanks. --Aminz 12:29, 30 December 2006 (UTC)