User talk:Arminden

Dan Bahat

See Dan Bahat, feel free to join in.. Zero^talk 02:03, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

in israel

If the category was "Archaeological museums run by Israel" or "Archaeological museums featuring Israeli history", you might have a point. But it isn't, so you don't. "In Israel" has a specific meaning that is only true here according to a minority political viewpoint. We'd like to stay away from political viewpoints altogether, but when that isn't possible we go with the mainstream. Zero^talk 06:55, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Incidentally, you are a good editor so I hope you continue. Zero^talk 06:56, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Z. Still, I've been working for travel guide publishers for so many years and know to appreciate complete info. Check Buq'ata, Mas'ada etc. for a very practicable compromise for Golan issues. There are no categories "Archaeological museums run by Israel" or "Archaeological museums featuring Israeli history" and it makes no sense to create them. Btw, this museum has a large focus on prehistory, another one on Byzantine period synagogues plus a bit on Roman-period Gamla, and I think nothing more recent than that, so nothing on Israel as such. Israel is "de facto" where, once you're on the ground, everything around you is Israeli - laws, currency, access (visa, entry points), language, people (yes, Jews aside, all Golan Druze have Israeli permanent residency and ID cards and some even adopted IL citizenship, all speak at least some Hebrew, use the Israeli health system, job market etc., etc.), so what the international law says is utterly irrelevant on the ground. Not what the Druze feel and think, but that's a different topic altogether and is more differentiated than one might think. There are (a few) tourists who refuse to visit the Golan along with all occupied territories, and that's why indicating the int'l legal status is for sure of some significance, but for smb. who's planning his trip or researching the topic and using the categories, the 2/3 of the Golan now controlled by Israel are in Israel for all intents and purposes. Belfast is in the UK, contested or not, I hate the fact that Putin got Crimea, but I won't try to visit it via Kiev, similarly with Abkhasia and Georgia, or the territories Romania lost to the Soviets through the Molotov-Ribbentrop treaty and never got back from the Ukraine even if the treaty has been declared nil and void, etc, etc, etc. I see WP as a source of practical info, not a manual of political correctness. The UN actually very much acknowledges de facto realities, while fighting for correct resolution of conflicts. I wouldn't be surprised or object if a Syrian Golan refugee would make it his goal to "fix" this issue, but you don't strike me as being Ahmad az-Zero Saif ad-Din al-Golani. Ma'assalama habibi and have a great day, Arminden (talk) 10:50, 16 February 2015 (UTC)Arminden

Seaman article

Hi, because I edit in the Israel-Palestine area of Wikipedia, I'm only allowed to use my administrator powers there in the most no-brain cases. Such as squashing vandals, which is not a description fitting this case. Blocking the recent IPs won't make a difference either, as whoever it is will just return with different IPs. The only way to slow down disruption is semi-protection, which again I am not allowed to impose myself. You should make a case for semi-protection at WP:RFP. Zero^talk 14:19, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try!Arminden (talk) 14:27, 17 March 2015 (UTC)Arminden

Edit to Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Hi there. I've been monitoring (not stalking!) your edits to the Middle East on and off since your constructive edits on the Acre article. You're clearly knowledgable in Middle East geography and affairs and I was prepared to swoop in and back you up if you made any constructive edits to articles that upset the pushy nationalist-political types that dominate parts of that topic area.

I'll briefly explain why I have effectively reverted your changes on the Ayaan Hirsi Ali article. It's important that the prose of the article flow well, and the statements in brackets disrupted that flow. There is also no need to use prose to negate any dubious statement or apologise for anything. If a statement is wrong or irrelevant, feel free to be WP:BOLD and just remove it, as I have done! AnotherNewAccount (talk) 13:33, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

---

Hi back, ANA. I'm really happy that you found some gain in following my WP editing. It sometimes seems to me that editors are the only ones who read what other editors contribute :) and it's usually with scorn, while the common users couldn't care less - so every good encounter is encouraging. For your backing I really do feel grateful and I thank you very much for your kind words about my efforts, knowledgeable or otherwise as thy might be.

I see you did anything but undo my edit, you actually removed the older bit I felt urged to set right. Thanks! I fear though that smb. might put it back in. If that happens, I'll happily leave it up to you to find a better-flowing sentence as a means of countering the wrong impression left on the cursory reader by that non-statement. Cheeres, Arminden (talk) 13:52, 30 April 2015 (UTC)Arminden

Hello @Arminden How are you today i loved your thing on god very entertaining because it says:

Hello i am @Arminden.

I couldn't stop laughing i think someone edited it when you said not too but it is a free world.

Goodbye. 83.100.161.198 (talk) 14:46, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Your hostility and bigotry are showing, Arminden

When you change the spelling of a word from "Ava" to "Ave" on Wikipedia and in the comment section, instead of writing "correct spelling," you write "that's Ava Gardner you meant; this on the other hand, is Latin or something like that, pre-Jahiliya in any case and infidels stuff)" it demonstrates rude and bigoted behavior. Not that you didn't already know that..VanEman (talk) 23:01, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

---

Wow, it worked better than I could have hoped for! You really did guess it's meant for you! I'm honoured. You did indeed go through all of my dozens of edits of yesterday till you found my "message in a bottle". You're a thorough man, Van. Put it to good use.Arminden (talk) 05:05, 2 May 2015 (UTC)Arminden

PS: Yes, I am hostile to people with more stubbornness than knowledge. No, bigoted I'm not, I'm very open to well-founded opinions different from mine. I hold knowledge to be important, comprehension even more so, and consider true intellectuals to have a heavier word to say than others. I don't count myself to be a scholar or an intellectual other than in attitude and striving. Political correctness is a substitute for civility and politeness which disregards the authority conferred by knowledge. Big words, simple truths. [Arminden]

Jerusalem/Holy Land Fifth Crusade

I can't believe I never noticed it said Jerusalem instead Holy Land. Nicely done. I can't believe I missed that. MontChevalier (talk) 21:29, 12 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.74.82.26 (talk)

---

Thank you for the flowers, i.e. merci mon chevalier! :) Don't get too wound up, neither did Guy notice the trap at Hattin, and that was more serious. Deus lo vult.Arminden (talk) 03:03, 13 May 2015 (UTC)Arminden

Re: Hazorim

If you mean HaZor'im, it was established by olim from Germany and the Netherlands from the Union of Religious Pioneers (ברית חלוצים דתיים), Ezra and the Mizrahi Youth. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 14:00, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Why don't you write so? :) I'll put it in, but quoting your talk page might not be enough for everybody.
PS: Hazorim - HaZor'im: the Yekke movement alive & kicking? "Bei uns sagt man richtig..." Can afford joking about it, just got an unneeded 100-point test certificate for German from Berlitz; some need it black on white. About the apostrophes etc.: I use them when I must, otherwise I go with Lawrence (of Arabia) who made fun of transliteration pundits--it's all a convention, some like some of it, some none of it, some swear by it. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 14:42, 14 May 2015 (UTC)Arminden

June 2015

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User:Makedonija. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Macedonia (talk) 10:54, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

---

don't know who you are, don't know what you're talking about, and seemingly you don't either. ignored. ps: i'm pretty much out of this wp BS altogether, so don't bother anymore with threatening, blocking, cursing in polit. correct ways, etc. [Arminden]

Boris Yefimovich Nemtsov

https://www.jta.org/1976/03/11/archive/davidovich-suffers-heart-attack

so here's an article with a Jewish Russian with the same name as Boris's father you're telling me he's not Jewish too ?

Whats your obsession with going around covering up Jewish people's names ? You some sort of Zionist history revisionist ?

---

Go to vodka detox, them read again, then talk. [Arminden]

Barid (caliphate)

Hello Arminden,

A while ago you made an expansion to the article Barid (caliphate). In regards to this statement:

"The etymology of the Arabic word "barid" is considered by P. K. Hitti in his History of the Arabs to be "unclear". He takes issue with two of the proposed origins, writing that "Babylonian buridu is just as unsatisfactory as Latin veredus.""

This had no direct citation, and when I went to go and find the quote I was unable to do so within Hitti's work. Instead, Hitti's explanation of the etymology of the word barid reads as follows (p. 322, n. 5): "Ar barid is probably a Semitic word, not related to Latin veredus, Pers birdan, a swift horse, Ar birdhawn, horse of burden." I did however find the quote, not in Hitti's book, but in a review of the book written by Richard N. Frye (here, page 585), in which he makes the quoted statement as an addendum to Hitti's p. 322 footnote. Would it therefore be more appropriate to change the citation from Hitti to Frye? Thanks, Ro4444 (talk) 18:42, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

---

Ro4444, hi. On the contrary, I must thank you. Please do go ahead and correct my mistake. I remember that I tried to figure out the etymology, was unsatisfied with the WP article as it was, and drowned in all kind of books and papers, one older than the other, which I found online. Please excuse me for leaving it up to you to fix the issue. Keep up the good work, Arminden (talk) 21:27, 3 August 2015 (UTC)Arminden

---

Great, glad to get that solved. I made the change and added a citation, so we should be good there. As for the etymology, most of the recent sources I used believed in either the Latin or the Persian origin; the Babylonian/Semitic theory doesn't seem to have been popular since the early 20th century (though my view may be colored by using predominantly English-language texts only). Even still, it was a good expansion for the article, for elaborating on the development of modern theories for the origin of the word. Thanks again for your help on this. Ro4444 (talk) 21:46, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Jewish articles

Hello Arminden. I noticed that you are very sure of yourself and the truth of your edits. Nevertheless, there are certain community established conventions and editing rules on Wikipedia, of which you might not always be aware. I would urge you to take any potentially controversial edit to the talkpage for discussion and consensus establishing prior to making such edits.

Relevant policies and guidelines: WP:CONSENSUS, WP:TRUTH, WP:BRD and many others regarding specific issues. Debresser (talk) 08:57, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

---

Hi @Debresser:. Thanks for your message. Honestly, WP is more of a "bad habit" of mine, I have no intention of spending any more time on doing additional studies of WP lingo and insider procedures beyond what accords with the real world, major encyclopedias and lexicons (Britannica, Larousse, Duden, etc.), common sense, and WP's usefulness for the common user.

The habit of using transliterated Hebrew terms as part of articles written in English is specific to religious Jewish circles. Not outside them. Check in the real world, google for terms, whatever. I will not fight anyone who has the time and hobby to deny reality on WP, of which there are many and who enjoy slugging it out on "talk pages" full of endless monologues. This is my own monologue :-) and all I have to say. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 10:31, 21 September 2015 (UTC)Arminden

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Joseph Zaritsky at kandinof yard,.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Joseph Zaritsky at kandinof yard,.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:44, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Just a note on BAS

Heya, so just letting you know, there are actually two similar publications run by BAS, one is Biblical Archaeology Review, which is their lovely print publication, and the other is their online Bible History Daily publication which I occasionally write for—although I was on the cover of BAR two years back. Easy mistake to make when citing, of course. I made the correction in the mikvah article footnote. Thank you though, it sure is nice to see my name cited on Wikipedia! Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 9 Tevet 5776 21:13, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

---

Sir William - or shall I say Sir Henry? -, I'm most honoured. I do get the daily newsletter,but didn't quite realise that it's fully independent of the print publication. Nice place to meet. Only in the field could be nicer. Keep up the good work! Happy holidays, Arminden (talk) 21:23, 21 December 2015 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 21:23, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Haha, just Henry. I'm not a knight nor am I eligible for such fancy things. The name is just very popular as you can imagine—though some fellow did accuse me of masquerading as him! I think a lot of the same people write for the print publication as the online one, but the online also has guest writers such as moi. Like I said, easy mistake especially because a lot more people think of BAR than BAS. And thanks! My days in the field might be done, but if they aren't, hopefully meet you there one day as well! Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 9 Tevet 5776 22:50, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

'See also' in desert castles

I don't think it makes sense to include a list of all desert castles as a "see also" in each desert castle article:

• A "see also" to desert castle gets to the full list.
• The articles generally already include a link to desert castle, and the manual of style says "As a general rule, the "See also" section should not repeat links that appear in the article's body or its navigation boxes."

Thanks, --Macrakis (talk) 21:43, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

---

Hi @Macrakis:. I am sure you are right, and I think with time most of these "See also" links will be deleted. But please, not yet though. The term "desert castles" has been wrongly limited to the Jordanian ones. My point is to inform people about the wider CONTEXT. The Middle East is a horribly tribal place, helping people see the wider picture, in whatever area, is a gain. Thank you and happy holidays! Arminden (talk) 22:02, 22 December 2015 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 22:02, 22 December 2015 (UTC) @Macrakis: PS: I think NONE of the pages relating to non-Jordanian desert castles did link to the term, and I'm not sure even the Jord. ones all did. Or used the term "qasr" as universally accepted terminology. The topic got far too little exposure, and it shows in the WP articles. Besides, it was me, today, who added the examples from Syria, Israel and Palestine to the list on the Desert castles page, so I went on to connect a bit farther, as part of the same "widening of the horizons". The term is extremely vague as it is, giving it at least geographically a clearer shape can only help.Arminden (talk) 22:08, 22 December 2015 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 22:08, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

spring-flow tunnels

Hi @Zero0000: Would you consider starting a page on spring-flow tunnels? I'm still not capable of that feat.
Zvi Y. D. Ron is/was THE specialist, he published apparently mainly between 1967-1992, but TAU still has him on its website [1]. There is even a mention of a Zvi Ron publishing on the topic in 2013 [2].
There is a lot on this at [3].
It's a technology DIFFERENT from the better known qanat (see below), it has apparently first been developed in the time of Herod the Great (didn't see enough proof to fully accept that), the Judean Mountains have the most examples. At Abu Ghosh and Battir Roman inscriptions were found at apparently pre-existing spring-flow tunnels, with the names of the 10th Legion Fretensis and 5th Macedonian Legion, the first from the time of the first revolt, the second connected with the Bar Kochba revolt. So the systems were there in the 60s CE/130s CE. I am not sure if I understood it correctly, that there is no proper aquiclude in the Judean Mountains, just some type of aquitard (marl or similar), which lets some of the water through, in any case, for catching more water, the idea was of digging tunnels until they reached - where? the wettest spot?-, building there a collection pool which gathered the entire flow from the exposed ceiling, and taking the water out via channels in the tunnel floor, to be then distributed to terraces. But this is what I gathered from less than academical sources. Ron has a publication which might contain his main results, Zvi Y. D. Ron, Agricultural terraces in the Judean Mountains, appeared in: Israel Exploration Journal 16 (1966) 33-49, 111-122, but I didn't find it online. There is only one useful quote I could find:

By terracing the hills, plots of agricultural land became available that did not take away from the land needed to harvest grains in the valleys. Several archaeologists maintain that terracing was the major technological innovation of the Iron Age.290 [Footnote 290: See, for example, Zvi Ron, “Agricultural Terraces in the Judean Mountains,” IEJ 16 (1966): 33–49, 111–22. Joseph A. Callaway, “A Visit with Ahilud. A Revealing Look at Village Life When Israel First Settled the Promised Land,” BAR 9 (1983): 42–53. Lawrence E. Stager, “The Archaeology of the Family in Ancient Israel,” BASOR 260 (1985): 1–35.]

Qanat vs. spring-flow tunnel: Although there are similarities in the construction techniques (both are excavated tunnels designed to extract water by gravity flow), there are crucial differences between the two. Firstly, the origin of the qanat was a well that was turned into an artificial spring. In contrast, the origin of the spring flow tunnel was the development of a ‘real’ spring to renew or increase flow, following an episode of the water table receding. Secondly shafts, which are essential to qanats, are not essential to spring flow tunnels.
That's about it. Interested? Cheers, Arminden (talk) 01:13, 29 December 2015 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 01:13, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Yavne-Yibna merger

@Zero0000: Hi Zero. I hope I'm not pinging you too often? Please tell me if I am. Now I stumbled upon this typical potayto-potahto double, Yavne and Yibna. I worked on the history part so as to help somebody access the info quickly and efficiently: all Muslim periods under Yibna, the rest under Yavne, with "main" tags and repetitions on both pages if interest overlaps. I think it's in every WP reader's interest to keep things simple & logical, but by now I know what will follow. Problem is that I only noticed afterwards that there's been a merger attempt, closed by a very IT-minded arbiter with a negative decision. Negative is OK, but his logic I cannot fully follow. I will NOT go into stuff like this, but I see you have, so - isn't there some logical guideline saying, for instance, that a defunct village gets its own history, while the still existing town that took its place gets all the rest? Especially parts which it claims a connection to? Or any other rational principle. Ideally such which are, look & smell neutral. My main issue is: you got bits of info here, bits there, some overlapped, some were in the wrong place (more on Yibna aspects at Yavne & viceversa). Endless mess. Doesn't serve anyone. Except that people don't act according to ration, robots do, I know. Suggestions? Thanks & cheers, Arminden (talk) 19:16, 24 January 2016 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 19:16, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, the overlap between the two articles looks pretty silly. There are still problems with the content, especially with the 1948-ish history. To summarise, Arab Yibna was on the site of ancient Yavne but was depopulated in 1948. As for modern Yavne, it was not founded on the same site and only in recent decades has it expanded enough that the ancient site is on its outskirts. Because of this I can understand the point of view that the ancient history belongs with Yibna and not with Yavne. Now, one important piece of history is missing: the founding of modern Yavne. It was not a case of resettling Yibna! I have a 1956 Israel map that shows Yibna as "abandoned" and יבנה (Yavne) as a new establishment about 1km north. Similarly, there is no "Yavne" in the complete list of recognised settlements which appeared in the 1952 Israeli Yearbook. I didn't find out what the full story is; do you have anything? Zero^talk 08:28, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

@Zero0000: Hi. You're giving me too much credit, I don't have much of anything in terms of non-archaeological data. But I know a bit about history and settlement, Zionist or otherwise. The tell has not been even excavated although it is located very conveniently because it has a lot of Ottoman village remains and Crusader walls at the top, and getting to what the Israeli archaeologists are most interested in, post-70 Yavne and maybe Israelite & Philistine Yavne, would mean destroying that first (see quoted book by Raz Kletter [4]). The mukhtar's house looked very much inhabited some 10 years ago, and the mausoleum of Abu Huraira is surrounded by city fabric. 1 km is nothing, sometimes the same population moves by even more after a major event. The name was preserved, and the location of a settlement is decided and defined by its convenient position on major trade roads, other site-specific sources of livelihood, source of water, important landmarks (mausoleum!), and in the past yes, defensive features (hill, tell) - so the latter one is the only unchecked box, but it is quite anachronistic. Nobody argued with topography against the merger. Plus self-definition is quite important, and they did call it Yavne. Kvutzat Yavne and Gan Yavne took those names rather than simply Yavne because they knew they're not *at* Yavne. Building next to, and not on top of former Arab villages, occurred in other places too. As a possible indicator to how "availavble" the tell and its surroundings was in 1948: the mosque/Crusader church was blown up only in 1950 (see Kletter), maybe together with other houses, maybe not - Kletter doesn't specify and Yeivin who protested with the IDF was always just interested in archaeology, not in modern residential buildings.
Another argument: if continuity comes up, which is ridiculous but likely to happen, the favissa was Philistine, Israelites and post-Exilic Jews didn't hold the coast for long periods. Byzantine Iamnia was much larger, they had a "large Samaritan population" (Negev & Gibson), so people came when times were good and left when they turned bad. There is no population continuity here any more than in any eastern Mediterranean town. An adversary of the merger made what I consider to be the best (if not fully accurate) point in the discussion: there was an Arab Yibna from C7 till 1948, and a Jewish Israeli town after that. Right. Except, who were the inhabitants in the first century or two after the Muslim conquest? I didn't find data on that, normally people stayed put for a while and either left later on, or converted, with or w/o new Arab settlers moving in right away - some Arabs came with Umar, some with Saladin, some with Baibars etc. Btw, Abu Huraira is buried in Medina, I would guess the mausoleum is probably Mamluk rather than 12th c. as the article claims, and the Mamluks had this policy of "inventing" holy tombs along the postal roads which were their only interest in Palestine (link betw. Cairo and Damascus), building makams there, and maybe attracting some settlers along with the pilgrims (see Sidna Ali, Nabi Musa). Also ironic: Abu Huraira was a Yemenite, so not much of a Palestinian/Philistine.
I see zero reason why Philistine, Israelite, Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine Yavne/Iamnia should be one topic, Yibna another, and Israeli Yavne a third, or some other combination leaving us with the HISTORY being split on two pages. There was no perfect continuity between any of those periods, and nobody normally asks for that. We can have 3 pages - History on one, with all periods, Yibna and Yavne each separate with their own period plus a "main" tag to the rest -, or 2 pages, giving primary focus to one of the two places who still do have "advocates" (unlike the long-gone ones), which is a matter of decision from above :-)
Going to eat, cheers Arminden (talk) 11:57, 25 January 2016 (UTC)ArmidenArminden (talk) 11:57, 25 January 2016 (UTC) PS: Somebody made a farfetched comparison to Constantinople vs. Istanbul. By far closer to the topic: City of David and Jerusalem. Nobody would argue that the C.o.D. belongs on the Silwan page rather than the Jerusalem one, although the CoD lay outside the city confines for endless centuries (70 - ?4th c.?, 1033-19th/20th c.). Why? Because the city moved, but kept some of its identity BEYOND its physical existence. This very much also applies to Yavne. (It's also true that Silwan did not extend onto the CoD ridge until the 19th c. No comparison is perfect.)Arminden (talk) 15:48, 25 January 2016 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 15:48, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Chalcolithic

Hi, the latest discussion on Talk:Chalcolithic might benefit from your attention. Zero^talk 08:31, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

@Zero0000:: Zero, hi. Thank you for inviting me to the discussion. I will need to take a 2-week break from WP and do some paid work, which is very good news. From what I have studied, the Middle Eastern Chalcolithic is considered by some heavy-weights as a period in its own right (i.e. Avraham Negev & Shimon Gibson, Gabriel Barkay). See the bronze hoard from the Cave of the Treasure in Wadi/Nahal Mishmar, possibly originating in the Chalcolithic temple from Ein Gedi. They did use copper, bronze was rare and primitive, alloyed with arsenic (possibly based on naturally occurring mixed ore, if I remember right), which meant: you didn't live to see your grandchildren grow as a Chalcolithic-era bronze metallurgist. There were areas where the transition from Neolithic to Ch. and from Ch. to Early Bronze happened gradually, but in general it was a sudden apparition, and then disappearance, of a very specific population and its culture. Sorry, but I need to go. Till next time, Arminden (talk) 00:29, 4 February 2016 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 00:29, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

@Zero0000:: Hi Zero. Did some restructuring, nothing much in terms of content, but now I hope it starts making more sense once the reader understands the different approaches from region to region. ArmindenArminden (talk) 19:08, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Is Tzurim the border Scopus-Olivet?

Mormon University is on the Mount of Olives !!!. 5.29.119.219 (talk) 05:13, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

@5.29.119.219: Thanks, but that's a statement, not a geographical definition or an argument :-)

Does anyone KNOW if the boundary Olivet-Scopus is defined as "along the Tzurim Valley" or not? Thanks, ArmindenArminden (talk) 09:57, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

TZURIM VALLEY is the border between Mount Scopus and Mount of Olives. 5.29.119.219 (talk) 11:49, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

@5.29.119.219: OK, I understand it's most likely true (and logical), and that you know this, but for WP it's useful to have a quotable source. There are two separating landmarks there, the Tzurim V. and the At-Tur road slightly S of it; unless one can quote some reliable source, it's hearsay. Frustrating, I agree. PS: having a WP identity helps with gaining credibility. Thanks, ArmindenArminden (talk) 12:00, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Ghassulian

About the revert in Ghassulian, both the text and the map say it is in modern Jordan. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:15, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

@Marcocapelle:: I put the map there! But read the name of the page: GHASSULIAN (culture, phase), and NOT Teleilat Ghassul! Then go on and read the lead: it says it's a culture stretching over western parts of Jordan, and southern Israel & Pal. Please go beyond the "first impression" when editing, you need to really know the topic first. Btw, T. Ghassul was excavated by Franciscan archaeologists when there was no Jordan, just a Trans-Jordan and a Palestine under the same British mandate regime, and the findings were brought to Jerusalem, where they still are on display. So yes, things are seldom linear. ArmindenArminden (talk) 08:23, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

There are two different trees relevant here, the history tree (for the "ancient" culture) and the archaeology tree (for the "modern" archaeological site). The latter tree is subcategorized by modern country. In this case the categories should presumably become Category:Ancient Levant and Category:Archaeological sites in Jordan. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:32, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good to me! As long as we keep them apart, I am happy for the added info. Thanks! ArmindenArminden (talk) 08:59, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

German

Regarding this edit summary,[5] I am not German, even though I know the language. Debresser (talk) 23:05, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

@Debresser: Dovid, I'm aware of that. I had hoped you'd get the point. Never mind. I have done some good work on that lead, eliminated a big logical mistake and made it much clearer. You came and removed some supporting elements. Whatever. It is not an easy topic, with a cloud of misconceptions flying around it, and for anyone who didn't study Judaism it's hard to understand. I haven't studied Judaism, but did learn about the 3 main monotheistic religions, what's essential in their understanding, some comparison, and how to put it across in a simple manner to others. Using layout (separate symmetrical paragraphs for opposed terms), bold letters, etc. helps clarify things, period. Contracting too much and eliminating such helpful elements is counterproductive and, after the effort I've put into explaining the logic of using them I find it, honestly, silly. The irony is that for the public at large "Talmud" is a synonym for "splitting hairs". If there is a topic where one should insist on a clear, didactic explanation, then this is IT. But I don't have the energy or intention to fight editors who doggedly refuse to see the light. (Arrogant? OK, but not the point.) Cheers, ArmindenArminden (talk) 06:36, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, you did good work there. There is some instruction in WP:MOS not to use bold unnecessarily, and this was such a case IMHO. I am fine with not seeing the light, and with you not having the energy or intention to fight about it. That makes life so much easier and more pleasant. :) Debresser (talk) 08:16, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

To you all: what is the purpose of WP?

I know the temptation of falling back on regulations and set rules & habits. And I know the risk of stopping to think and relying strictly on those. If WP serves any purpose, it's of offering the user/reader easy access to good information. That is the raison d'etre or "fundamental law" of WP. Period. All the WP rules are made to serve that purpose. When rules and logic come into conflict with each other, it's like a law being contested in front of the constitutional court. There, as here, the question asked is: does it serve the purpose, as stated by the "fundamental law"? The spirit of the law takes precedence over the letter of the law. So, when something helps the user/reader without harming the page, it's good and it should stay. Robotically removing good info based on some WP regulation, which is anyhow subject to constant improvement, is not constructive, meaning: harms the value of WP to the reader. Please consider this. Thank you. ArmindenArminden (talk) 07:25, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Maps

Click on the image, follow the "more information" link to Commons, and there you will see the information provided by the uploader. In this case, the book the map is from. Zero^talk 02:29, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

@Zero0000: Hi, and thanks. I have, of course, but I am aware of no such book ("Palestine", 1889) by Conder. If you have it, or inf. about it, would you please upload it onto Conder's page? Thanks! ArmindenArminden (talk) 02:42, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

See here. It is one of many books derived from Conder's more extensive scientific books. Zero^talk 03:07, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

@Zero0000: Thank you! ArmindenArminden (talk) 04:33, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Eudoxia (name)

Do not insult people in your edit summaries WP:Portal isn't some obscure guideline. It is THE guideline that covers portals. It's also found in other MOS pages, such as Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout. I also gave other template that are usually used in sections. Bgwhite (talk) 20:05, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

We're following a pattern. I am offering smth. useful to the user, the only guideline worth following, and you come and take it out quoting formal WP rules. I'm not even going into how you happen to edit topics which are of direct importance to my work, but don't seem to interest you in any way until I touch them. I can pretend to be a (ro)bot and write like one, or I can speak up my mind, w/o calling names, but being frank. If this insults you, well, sometimes there are ways to insult logic and common sense, and that might be slightly more offensive. I won't take it any further. As you probably noticed, I attempted to deter a bot (Yobot) from making that same unfortunate revert once again, and it seemed as if it had worked; but I really didn't try to argue with you, because I frankly don't think I can reach you with my arguments. In radio terms, we don't seem to have a common frequency, none. So let's try and stay out of each other's way and leave things at this. Anything else would be a waste of time and nervous energy for both, and life is too short and the internet to huge to go into this. Thank you for your understanding. Adios, ArmindenArminden (talk) 21:00, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

The most reasonable rule here: "Wikipedia: Ignore all rules"

For anyone who's wasting their & my time on WP: please read Wikipedia:Ignore all rules first, before insisting on endless going-by-the-letter reverts, mono- or dialogues and the like. Thanks. ArmindenArminden (talk) 19:57, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Umm Junieh

In British maps of the mandate period, the site is called "Kh. Umm Jūna". I don't know a source calling it that while it was still a living village. Zero^talk 00:36, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Armenian Quarter

Hello Arminden, I noticed you have a running threat with Yerevantsi on Armenian Quarter. I wondered if I could help but I had a bit of trouble following the discussion. What was the original problem? You can respond on my talk page if you want. Thanks. Foreignshore (talk) 16:47, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Running thread, not threat. Sorry! Foreignshore (talk) 16:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

@Foreignshore: Hi, and thanks! Yereveantsi seemed to be the "representative" of all things Armenian in Jerusalem, but maybe it's only the name that made me think that. I tried to figure out what actually IS the Armenian Quarter (AQ), since when is it there and how did the boundaries vary in time, how is it defined etc. I have formulated it as briefly and well as I could on the talk page under "Boundaries...?". If you want, please take a look. I always try to define the topic as precisely as possible before starting to deal with it, and the AQ is not so well defined, the "ideal" map is a perfect rectangle, but some bits in the east are now counted as part of the Jewish Quarter, which brings in the propagandists who spoil every discussion concerning Israel/Palestine. So facts first :-) That brings us to the next talk page topic: "Encroachment of Jewish Qtr: demography & history, or political pressure?". The maps differ, by choosing one over another one takes position in a dispute.

Then I tried to research smth. online, with little success. Is Thoros an Armenian version of Theodore? Is there a saint by that name? I'll copy here my question from the AQ talk page: St. T(h)oros Church is puzzling me. Hethum I built it in memory of his son killed in battle by the Mamluks, but Prince T(h)oros was not a saint, so the St. T(h)oros Church must have been dedicated to/named for a Saint T(h)oros. Who would that be? If you can find out, please add him, even as a "red link", to the respective disambiguation page (Thoros, Toros, Theodore?), and please link the name on the St. Toros Church page to that saint.

That's that. Thank you for offering to help out, no matter if you do or don't have any answers. Cheers, ArmindenArminden (talk) 20:37, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Community editing

Please read my latest post at Talk:Kadesh_(Israel)#Propose_deletion_:-.29_.2F_RENAMING. Please also review WP:SHOUT. Debresser (talk) 11:17, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Palestine Department of Antiquities

Hi, I'm preparing an article: see here. I'm not sure about the title, since there is a similarly named modern body that shouldn't be confused with it. If you know of any good sources or have suggestions for improvement, please let me know. Something missing is the way in which it interacted with the archaeological bodies like ASOR, PEF, FrenchOne, etc.. Zero^talk 04:33, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Zero. Great idea. I would add "Mandate" to the title, either at the beginning or before the brackets: Mandate Palestine's DoA (...) / DoA, Mandate Palestine (...) "Mandatory" would work as well, but the title is quite long already as it is. If you add "Mandate" or "Mandatory", you might even drop the years from the title. This wording is very explicit and I did come across it, don't think anyone will object or ask for sources. Now I have to run, the real world got me back again. Thank you for calling!

PS: links or cross-reference I can think of

• British Museum -- Department of Antiquities (founded in 1807). After a brief online search, I couldn't find any British state-run institution that existed in 1920 and could have been the inspiration for the ~ and its name, maybe this one was?
• Mandatory Pal. -- Government
• IAA
• Department of Antiquities of Jordan < Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities
• Pal. equivalent
• Rockefeller Museum

Arminden (talk) 07:43, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

New edition at Department of Antiquities of Mandatory Palestine. Zero^talk 12:13, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, and congratulations!Arminden (talk) 13:12, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

@Zero0000:"The Palestinian Department of Antiquities and Cultural Heritage has conducted work in the West Bank since 1994."- what about the Gaza Strip? 48-67: the Egyptians?Arminden (talk) 16:10, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Good question. I left it out because I'm not sure about it. Zero^talk 01:08, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Wadi al-Hasa

Now the main article is Wadi al-Hasa. Both Wadi Hasa and Wadi Zered are redirects to it. In the process I lost your talk page comment. I hope it is ok now. Zero^talk 10:37, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

@Zero0000: Thank you so much! One day I'll learn that, too. Probably... :-) Arminden (talk) 10:53, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

You made some little redirect cycles, then I turned it into a big mess of redirect cycles with the page text actually deleted. I needed to use my administrator super-powers to undelete it, move it to a temporary name, delete all of the mess, then rename it back to its proper name. Zero^talk 11:14, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

@Zero0000: I truly apologise. I had no idea. First I renamed it very easily to "Wadi Hasa", which is used quite frequently in English, but then I wanted to add the article al- and the simple option was somehow gone from the menu. I guessed the "Wikipedia" option would do the trick, but it didn't. Two steps of mine, hundred of yours to fix it... Sorry again. There's a Romanian saying, one half-wit throws a stone into the well and hundred smart people work hard to pull it out again.Arminden (talk) 11:22, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

No need to apologise! It only took a minute. Zero^talk 23:47, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

reply

Hi. How did you know that i am a doctor?.i studied medical ethics very well and I am the 8th most editing user at medical context. What i do is according to wp:category it stated that: Names of topic categories should be singular, normally corresponding to the name of a Wikipedia article. Examples: "Law", "France", "George W. Bush". And i think this rule apply here. So i just apply the conventional naming rule. Israel is a occupational entity and palestanian just defence to free their country. Palestine is for palestenian and if someone occupy thier houses they have the right to use any mean to restore their homes and country--مصعب (talk) 14:54, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

CAMERA

Hi, CAMERA is an organization that exists entirely for propaganda purposes. It cannot under any circumstances be used as a source of fact as it is far below the required reliability. Zero^talk 11:42, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Jerusalem lead

Hi, Please note that any change to the lead of Jerusalem needs to be done with a consensus, you can't just make changes to the article's lead. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 14:30, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Just did that a few days ago, only fixing obvious inaccuracies and pious mistakes and, so far, nobody has reverted my changes. The truth is in the pudding, still :) There are no holy cows, boldness (sorry, big word, but promoted as a WP guideline) is better than endless conversations (unless one is already retired and missing virtual company). Edited from my phone. Either me, when I find the time, or any decent editor with a PC, can add dozens of good sources supporting Shalem/Salim over the pretty-sounding "peace city" feel-good propaganda. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 15:10, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

That is true in most cases, but Jerusalem had an RFC and then an ARBCOM decision, so the normal rules don't necessarily apply. You can see the talk page for more info. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 15:17, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

On the other hand, if nobody disagrees with the edit, and it is a minor edit, I wouldn't wake sleeping dogs. Debresser (talk) 19:51, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

I agree, I was just pointing it out, in case he accidentally puts in something pro-Israel and finds himself at AE. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 20:06, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Me and pro-something? Joking, right?Arminden (talk) 20:09, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Mess

Arminden, you are making a mess of the two articles Ancient synagogues in Israel and in Palestine. Please refrain from crossing from one to the other. You are practically enforcing some idea of yours about what the scope of these two respective articles should be without any prior discussion. You simply can't do that. Especially on articles where 1. there is prior discussion about this subject 2. WP:ARBPIA might be involved. Debresser (talk) 16:42, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

@Debresser: Hi. I don't get you. The pre-/post- 70 CE distinction is essential. What's the problem? I practically added a paragraph listing the pre-70 CE synagogues, which are of high interest to both Jews (before Yavneh and Yohanan ben Zakkai they only served as place of reading the Bible), and the Christians (Jesus preached in many of them). Also, making distinction between "State of Israel" and "Land of Israel" in the scope of the two pages is more than needed - I looked up smth. on "Israel" page and thought I'm reading a Hamas brochure till I understood that it's an (as such almost useless) sub-page of the larger "Palestine" page, which was only mentioned at "Also see", a category easily missed by most. The other edits are all minor, don't affect the previous structure. Please explain.

"Archaeologists have uncovered many remains of synagogues from over two thousand years ago" - not true. In the Land of Israel there are at the most 4: Umm el-Umdan at Modi'in, Tulul Abu el-Alayik (very uncertain), Gamla (contested by some), Modi'in Illit (little published). Not over 2000 years old, but still 2TP (so pre-70 CE) are a maximum of 7 more: Wadi Hamam (Nahal Arbel), City of David ("Theodotus synagogue"), Magdala, Masada, Herodium, posibly Capernaum, and Tel Rechesh in Nahal Tabor. Basta. Qumran, Jacob Ory's second, ghost synagogue at Chorazin, and Alexander Onn's at Shuafat only deserve a mention if one wants to be over-inclusive.

"Synagogues securely dated to before the destruction of the Temple" do NOT include Capernaum and Qumran. Capernaum (the black structure underneath the "white synagogue" of C4 has not been excavated except for some minor areas, it's no more than conjunction on the base of the principle "once holy, always holy" - plausible YES; "securely dated" - certainly not. Qumran: there is no proof whatsoever that any of the excavated rooms served as a synagogue; there are 2 large rooms which MIGHT have served this purpose, so weak conjecture, nothing else.

Dabura leads to a silly comics figure. The "Golan" addition might wake sleeping dogs (Israel, heh?), but that's not an argument for a wrong wikilink.

Please refrain from reverting en masse, unless you have GOOD arguments for each single element. I do in this case.Arminden (talk) 17:34, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

One more revert, and you'll find yourself reported for violating WP:ARBPIA. In addition, please also review WP:BRD. Pushing that revert button is still a big problem of yours. Debresser (talk) 17:59, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

As usual, we'll talk this over on the talkpage, and we'll come up with something that improves the article. But you have to stop edit warring! Debresser (talk) 18:06, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Calm down. One (1, like in uno - eins - un) revert is never a "war". Get the facts right, then get back to work. Arminden (talk) 18:10, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Two reverts, one on two articles. In any case, I think we are already forming some consensus on the talkpages. Debresser (talk) 19:18, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Dome of the Rock

Hello
I see you added “Dubious-discuss” tags a while ago to a couple of statements here, but hadn't put anything on the talk page (per the relevant guideline) to explain what the problem is. Perhaps you could remedy that, as otherwise there is no obvious reason to keep them. Thanks, Moonraker12 (talk) 16:07, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hi. Your edit summary here seemed a bit rude. Thanks. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 06:10, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Killing civilians is a bit rude, too. And quite a bit rude is also sympathysing with it, and hiding a fact - terrorist, murder - behind euphemisms like "militant".Arminden (talk) 11:54, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

"Immovable Ladder", or The Best Joke on This Page

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing.

Church of the Holy Sepulchre 13:46, 26 January 2018

quotation from article: "removal of the "Immovable Ladder","

Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:53, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Please, come to your senses. Check my edits and then start talking of "vandalising". You're so out of control that you can't even get the section title right. The "Immovable Ladder" isn't worth more than a footnote, definitely not a mention in the lead and 4 (!) wikilinks within the Holy Sepulchre article. That's the holiest church in Christianity, and the ladder is just a weird detail. It's still there, with one or two wikilinks, mentioned in a hat tag or whatever it's called, so basically yet another wikilink at the top the "facade" paragraph, and the whole ladder history is widely presented - that's far more space than it actually deserves. So calm down. Have a nice weekend, Arminden (talk) 14:02, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

You vandalized the page, period. If you don't like that being linked there, then actually get rid of it rather than vandalize the page.Link Vandalism That's my opinion. quotation from article: "removal of the "Immovable Ladder"," (I don't care if the ladder is in the article zero times or a thousand times. But what you did is link vandalism. That's all I mean to say.) Geographyinitiative (talk) 14:06, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Arminden, it looks like you made a typo at 13:46 on 26 January at Church of the Holy Sepulchre, writing Immovable Ladder, leaving the letter 'I' out of the wikilink brackets. See User talk:Geographyinitiative#This could have been a typo on Immovable Ladder?. I removed the word 'Vandalism' from the above header, since it is not vandalism. EdJohnston (talk) 17:22, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Now I see. EdJohnston, thank you! I thought the angry Geo guy made the typo when he started this nonsense here. Sorry for the typo. There is no way in the world it can be misconstrued as intentional - just follow the logic of my chain of edits. Enough of it, let's go on with our lives. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 17:49, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

As of Church of the Holy Sepulchre at 10:28, 26 January 2018 Arminden, the page was as follows:

quote from page: "of the "Immovable Ladder,""

after the change to Church of the Holy Sepulchre at 13:46, 26 January 2018 Arminden, the page was as follows:

quote from page: "of the "Immovable Ladder","

It is an example of 'changing internal or external links on a page to inappropriate targets'. link vandalism. Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:24, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

"Adding or changing internal or external links on a page to disruptive, irrelevant, or inappropriate targets while disguising them with mislabeling." ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 14:19, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

1rr vio

You violated 1rr on ARBPIA with this edit, kindly self revert.Icewhiz (talk) 20:19, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Jeppiz (talk) 21:28, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

I've closed this report. Please note the result. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:57, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Adding new unsourced material with a citation needed tag

I'm amazed you've done that. It's your job to source material that you want to add. You know about our verifiablity policy I'm sure. Doug Weller talk 10:03, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Don't be. I have it from Professor Gabriel Barkay. I'll look for a source if I find the time. It's a highly worthy bit of info, and has no bias whatsoever. Such are often incentives for other editors, much like red links. Always with the reader's benefit in mind, first and foremost! Cheers, Arminden (talk) 11:08, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

@Doug Weller:: Thank you Doug. It seems that Prof. Barkay still is close to the mainstream opinion as it flows around the Net, but the scholarly debate has moved on. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 15:41, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Tel Megiddo dates

I liked your edit at Tel Megiddo. If you don't have other sources ready try this one: Early_Iron_Age_Epigraphy_and_Chronological_Revision_a_summary_article_in_P._James_and_P._van_der_Veen_eds._Solomon_and_Shishak_ trespassers william (talk) 12:27, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, Danny. It took a lot of reading, and in the end it seems that Prof. Barkay isn't so up-to-date anymore. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 15:37, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Monfort

There is not a single sourced statement in the paragraph I edited, so it is fair game for deletion. Instead of deleting, I edited it for poor English and repetition. So much for trying to improve the article...Once you are reverting, by the way, you are welcome to re-add the ugly tag at top citing lack of references.--Geewhiz (talk) 07:51, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Gilabrand:. It was a stub, I fleshed it out, added all the sources one can get relevant info from (except Piana), so now it's about slow patient work. There's nothing there I didn't find in Boas & Khamisy, Pringle or Biller, or in other good sources. I see no reason to remove good info at this stage. If you have the time, check out Mathias Piana, Burgen und Städte der Kreuzzugszeit, Michael Imhof Verlag (2008). It's great if you fix the English, but please w/o removing info. Thanks, Arminden (talk) 08:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Restoring Unsourced Material at Zimri (prince)

Hello, Arminden. Your recent edit [6] to Zimri (prince) restored unsourced material in violation of Wikipedia policy. Here's the relevant policy page: WP:V. And here's a relevant quote:

Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source.

If other sections are also in violation of WP:V, then they should be fixed, but the existence of unsourced material in the "Islam" section is not carte blanche to restore unsourced material elsewhere in the article, especially unsourced material that accuses living persons of belonging to a terrorist group. See WP:BLP. Alephb (talk) 10:58, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Alephb. We have a misunderstanding. First, I did quote a valid source. Second, I don't think there were any names mentioned there, so no specific person can be affected; and apart from that, the four initial "Priests" have been legally convicted, which eliminates the issue of hearsay/POV or whatever. Cheers,

Tartaria Tablets

Good work but section headings should not be posed as questions, see MOS:HEADINGS. Doug Weller talk 12:04, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

I wish I could find opinions about Haarmann - I'm pretty dubious about him, not that I'm happy with Merlini either. Doug Weller talk 12:09, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Question marks: shortest way to indicate controversy. Otherwise risk of overly long headings for 2nd- or 3rd-grade paras.

Research: Doug, sorry, no time. Too much spent here as is. About to be killed for it :)

Epiphany (holiday) changes

Your changes were unexplained, and they violated, WP:LANGVAR, MOS:DATEFORMAT and other things. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:26, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

---

Hi @Walter Görlitz:. If you prefer, we can communicate in German. You reversed wholesale w/o properly looking through the edits.

"Orthodox" requires a capital O, no discussions there.

Spaces: I edit quite a bit on my phone. In citation notes, long words like "accessdate" create awkward blanks; using a (WP allowed) hyphen solves the problem. Similarly, adding spaces between categories has the same result. Try and you'll see. Nobody has ever had an issue with it until now.

Spaces in and under headings: fully unneeded, not required - in ENGLISH Wikipedia, unlike other languages. However, separating picture files from the text by a space helps editors find what they're looking for.

I hope this clarifies my intentions. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 07:48, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Feel free to apply the capital "o". Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:30, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

How generous. You broke it,you fix it. Had enough of stiff, self-righteous WP patrolmen. Arminden (talk) 16:38, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Belmont and Belmonte

Hi Arminden, just wanted to let you know that I altered your edits to Belmont. Belmont is already quite long and there is a disambiguation page for Belmonte, so I don't think we need to make Belmont even longer by adding 'Belmonte' items. And if we do decide to add Belmonte, we should add them all. Leschnei (talk) 14:04, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah into Holy Fire. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:08, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

I had no idea. Big BS, anyway, none of us is here for the "credit", but donating time for the sake of the user. I did what I could - I'm just using my phone in a hotel room after work. If you have time to spare, pls try to add the 2018 TV interview of the Armenian cleric who witnessed 3 times how the Patriarch lit the candles from a lamp. Cheers,

St Theoctistus

@Zero0000 and Mannanan51: Hi, sorry to bother, I still lack some basic editing skills. Could you please create a page for "Theoctistus of Palestine", using what's already there on the Euthymius page and the disambiguation page? Thank you as always! Cheers, Arminden (talk) 07:53, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

It is created. I leave the copy-editing to you. Zero^talk 09:46, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

@Zero0000 and Mannanan51: "It is created" - the words of a true demiurge! Many thanks, truly grateful. Arminden (talk) 13:36, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits

Arminden, I wanted to thank you for your very good and pertinent edits on Mosaic of Rehob. Keep-up the good work!Davidbena (talk) 00:42, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

@Davidbena: David, thank you so much! I really appreciate it.

This is for Your Information

User:Arminden, shalom. As you questioned whether or not there was a synagogue named "Rambam" in Jerusalem, the following link is to allay all doubts: Enjoy! Click here. ---Davidbena (talk) 11:27, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@Davidbena: David, hi, and thank you! I have searched as much as I could, and have in the end written to the contributor who has taken & posted the picture, and on the Wikimedia page, as well, waiting for answers like yours. Almost all existing "Rambam Synagogue" postings describe or show the Ramban Synagogue, so I thought that it's always a case of typo/mix-up. I will amend my postings. Thanks and cheers, Arminden (talk) 12:50, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

I have already corrected three of them. If there are more that need correcting, you'll be the judge of that.Davidbena (talk) 12:52, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

English Wikipedia

User:Arminden, shalom. I noticed where you were taken aback by the way some of our Wikipedia pages are written in such a way as to place a transliterated foreign word before its actual English meaning. My humble view on this matter is that it depends on what the article actually treats about. In Sefer Torah it seems relatively alright to place the English meaning before its Hebrew transliteration, but I must say that this is not always the case. Take, for example, other foreign words used now in English: Hamantash, or Shofar, or Za'atar, or Genmaicha, or Onsen, or Wampum, or Sushi, or Minyan, or Glasnost, or Perestroika, among an endless host of other foreign loan-words whose names are known as such by most English speakers. The article Tallit, it would seem, falls into this last category, since it is well-known by such name. I see no rule that requires of us to put the English meaning first. Of course, an explanation is almost always given in ordinary English which explains the meanings of these foreign words.Davidbena (talk) 11:59, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@Davidbena:, Hi David! I think you slightly misunderstood something. I am very much aware that languages have always borrowed words from other languages when needed. What is as well known to me, is that in religious Jewish circles it is very common to mix Yiddish or Hebrew terms into the language spoken in the country of residence, and mainly religious terms. There is nothing new here. The problem is, unlike sushi or pizza, tefillin or tallit are words not understood by probably over 90% of the native speakers of that language (if not more), not to speak of Wikipedia users who look up English Wikipedia, but aren't all that fluent in English. I can assure you that the vast majority of Judaism-related terms are total Chinese to pretty much all of the Gentiles, and to a great many of the secular Jews. The more one is immersed into a certain lifestyle, the harder it becomes to realise how little known that particular lifestyle is to non-members. So, I have zero problem with Torah, bagels, maybe also gefilte fish being used as such: but none of the terms I replaced in the articles are widely known outside religious Jewish circles. Just do a test, and you'll be surprised. Beyond anything I might say here, that could sound subjective, I am sure Wikipedia must have some guidelines regarding non-English terms for which there is a well-established English equivalent (tefillin-phylacteries, tallit-prayer shawl), and the obligation to explain in plain English those which do not have English equivalents. Honestly, I have learned most of these terms in English first, from books and alike, and some I still don't understand unless they're explained in English - and you can see that I'm not an absolute beginner in this field, even though I'm nowhere close to being well-versed, either. Many of these articles I looked up in order to learn something new, and the Hebrew was an obstacle. So I guess I'm a good case of (average?) "Wikipedia user". Thanks for keeping up the dialog, and all the best - Arminden (talk) 13:26, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

The proper English word for Tefillin is "phylacteries." A simple redirect (e.g. Phylacteries) will often correct the problem of unfamiliarity with the Hebrew word, but even here it will take you to a disambiguation page with other relative meanings. Jewish audiences make-up a large percentage of users on the English Wikipedia, and almost all Jewish readers will understand the Hebrew loan-words tallit and tefillin. In fact, many non-Jews already recognise these words for what they are. If in doubt, you should raise the issue on the article's Talk-Page. This will help you reach a larger consensus. The gist of the matter is this: Even where a word such as Onsen is not understood by all English speakers, its specific and prominent use in one language makes it a legal term of use in other languages.Davidbena (talk) 13:49, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

David, I am exposed to many hundreds if not thousands of non-Jews of various origins annually, and I think I know from first-hand experience how well they are accustomed to Jewish terminology when confronted with it: not. Let's not forget the difference between the bunch of people active here as editors, or our friends from a chosen environment, and the vast majority of people who do look up WP every now and then, but aren't studying the topics in depth. As about secular Jews... you'd be surprised. Traditional education isn't what it used to be :) About many Jews using Wikipedia: so what, and then it's fair to leave the rest outside? I won't even start reminding you who's been using that argument against Jews. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 14:32, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@Arminden:, Even so, a non-Japanese person who is not familiar with the Japanese words Onsen and Genmaicha, or a non-Jew who is not familiar with the Yiddish words Gefilte fish and Hamantash, or one who is not familiar with the Russian or Arabic languages, but who read pages containing other foreign loan-words such as Glasnost, or Perestroika, or Za'atar, that in itself is not enough to diminish from their use on Wikipedia, nor to change the article's format. The criteria, I would think, would be that these foreign words are prominently used in their native country and enjoy some wide-spread popularity within their country so as to warrant its use in the English-language online encyclopedia. If you wish to change Wikipedia's policy regarding this, take the issue to the Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Be well.Davidbena (talk) 15:25, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

User:Davidbena, David, did you look at my actual edits? I always left the Hebrew term in place AT LEAST once on the page, in the lead or in another prominent place, but replaced it with the well-established English word (where there is one) in the rest of the text. Where the term is very specific and has no popular English equivalent, I added an explanation next to it, because constant clicking is a big nuisance; the user will thank me :) All in all, I am sure no rule needs to be changed: ENGLISH must have priority, and specific Hebrew terms have to be mentioned AND explained. Nothing revolutionary. Whereas the opposite--yes, that does break the rules of any encyclopaedia.
What's with you and Perestroika? I loved Gorbachev for it, but it has nothing to do with this discussion: it's like champagne or Renaissance -- it only covers the entire meaning if you use the original word. In this case it's a Russian, but by now international, word. For tefillin you have phylacteries; for Perestroika you don't have any English word. Comes from the fact that Christian Europe has been dealing with Jews and their religion ever since... forever; the USSR and Japanese food are, in comparison, fast-passing trends. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 16:53, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I did look at your edits, and with the exception of Tallit, you are right. Even with "Tallit" it was unnecessary, in my view. I was more concerned about a trend here, where you would go through all the foreign-word pages and preempt a term that is explained later in the page. Perestroika was used here merely as an example of a foreign loan-word, perhaps not readily understood by many who speak English, and yet requires no further explanation before being introduced with the word.Davidbena (talk) 17:00, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

edit summaries

is not appropriate. nableezy - 23:13, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

@Nableezy: you're right, sorry, I apologise. I was getting desperate. The text was so substandard that it was hard to believe it made it in. When it comes to Muslim history, people are so unaware of their own national past, and in turn are so soaked in propaganda that it's painful. The text was mixing up Muslim dynasties centuries apart, but made a point in favourably comparing Ghassanids to Herodians in holding on to a region. Duh... Where's the point, other than "Arabs are better than Jews"? It's schoolyard level. Of course, there was no "Byzantine Rome" when the Herodians were around, and the term itself is a bit of an original invention. Things like Qutuz not being a sultan yet at 'Ain Jalut are small mistakes in comparison. Or "the Heights represented a formidable obstacle the Crusader armies were not able to conquer", when they actually held Banias for decades and had a condominium with Damascus over the Sawad/Suete for quite a while.
Maybe you can help me learn something: who were the Arab geographers of the sixth century describing the Golan as a jebel? I say 6th because that was the topic of the quoted book, but maybe I'm wrong and "Byzantine period" means later here, even though it becomes problematic if that still can be termed Byzantine if it means later than 636. If it's a correct fact though, I'd be truly very happy to learn about it. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 04:59, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

To be totally frank with you, Im not actually Syrian (or Palestinian), so it isnt really my own national past, and my interest in the Golan is mostly confined to the modern politics of it. You'l notice I have not even touched any of your edits on this subject (the only one I reverted was your changing something about the modern political situation into a claimed from said). If I knew the answers to those questions I would certainly try to lend a hand, but to be honest in recognizing my own limitations, I dont know the answer to your question. Just the edit summary read as a bit demeaning, and as the edit itself was fine (as far as I know) I thought it better to nip that in the bud with you here. Take care, nableezy - 12:55, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Your message

Hello Arminden, I was scrolling at my talk page history and found your message. I remember now that I had removed it without reading. I do apologize for doing so. I know its been a few years already, but it just now dawned at me. I should've replied. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 22:16, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Nadav Na'aman

Hi, it seems that Nadav Na'aman, one of the most important Israeli archaeologists, doesn't have an article. Could it be? [7] [8] Might you be the one to create it? Hint, hint. Zero^talk 19:48, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

@Zero0000: hi, and thank you for your trust. I'll be working away from home for quite a while, no way I can do it on my phone. Let's see when I'll manage to get to it. Life's getting in the way :) Have a great day.

Plene scriptum

Arminden, thanks for calling my attention to the fact that someone ought to write an article describing the import of the Latin term Plene scriptum. Well, there is now such an article. Thanks for nudging me in this direction.Davidbena (talk) 23:40, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

@Davidbena: - David, thank you, I'm rushing now to read it!

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Arminden,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 15:38, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Arminden,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 20:39, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

advertenciarap060@RMaung (WMF) 2804:D45:E067:3500:9075:FD37:827C:7648 (talk) 17:19, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Suggested edit

Arminden, shalom. Please see my response to your constructive edit on the Tarichaea article, which you can see here.Davidbena (talk) 00:52, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for fixing that silly error on the Lovers of Cluj-Napoca article. Can't believe I didn't catch that. -TrynaMakeADollar (talk) 06:53, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Bobby Fischer

You may wish to comment on Talk:Bobby Fischer#Ben Klassen. Thanks. Bruce leverett (talk) 03:31, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Alexander Jannaeus

Hello, I'm Jerm. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Thank you. Jerm (talk) 21:43, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

@Jerm: Hi Jerm. Sorry, we don't know each other yet. What edit are you referring to please? Arminden (talk) 21:48, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

You know exactly which one. If you can't maintain civility, then you don't need to be editing. You also reverted again and ignored my edit summary concerning WP:BRD. Jerm (talk) 21:53, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I had some 3 reversals lately. Please don't assume, be more specific. Arminden (talk) 21:56, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Alexander Jannaeus, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jerm (talk) 07:42, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

@Jerm: I must leave the house now, but let's invite some distinguished arbiters later in the day. For now, please refrain from bulk-reversing. If you think you must disagree with one or another of my edits, please discuss them here or there; we can reach agreement, as you have seen these past days. Bulk reversals though and gratuitous accusations of vandalism harm both the quality of the article, and your own reputation, so please hold back with those. Thank you. Arminden (talk) 07:49, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

@Nishidani and Zero0000: I see Jerm won't accept a civilised discussion. Please do take a look at the edits [9] and decide. Thank you very much. Arminden (talk) 07:54, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

When you remove sourced content and manipulate it where it contradicts the source, then I have a right to remove it. Per WP:BRD, you should've been starting discussions at the articles talk page to begin with, but I have do it for you since the only thing you know how to do is revert. Yes, all you do is revert editors who disagree with your changes. Your editing style and the way you interact with other editors who disagree with you hasn't changed since you started editing. And I already know you are familiar with editors @Nishidani and Zero0000:. Per WP:CANVAS, such behavior like pinging other editors is not really acceptable. You could have at least started a discussion, but you want them to establish an argument on your behalf or preserve your new changes. Either way, I am treating your new changes as disruptive and vandal-like. Jerm (talk) 08:24, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Jerm (talk) 16:47, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

• I saw the ANI thread and have looked at your recent activity. You really need to take on board MOS:ERA. The project has very little tolerance for people churning stylistic choices like this without consensus. EEng 09:24, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

  Let me add something else. Because of the specialized nature of the material I can't judge a lot of the changes you made; some where clearly improvements, the fixing of a comma splice being one case my eye happened to fall on. In addition, you're right that it's best that other editors selectively review and back out bits and pieces of your changes, leaving other parts they think useful in place, but when you make very large numbers of changes in a single edit that becomes very hard to do. My advice would be edit one section at a time. EEng 20:02, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Ugh

You just walked into a hornets nest, changing AD to CE. I learned that here: I thought it would be "a cakewalk" to change Siege of Jerusalem (70 AD) to Siege of Jerusalem (70 CE): hah! ...was I ever wrong. If I recall correctly, the WP:ERA rules came out of some of the very first arbcom cases, 10-15+ years ago: that is why they are so cumbersome, (see eg WP:Requests for arbitration/Sortan; WP:Requests for arbitration/jguk 2) Huldra (talk) 23:37, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

What are we actually doing here? How many normal people, who are not themselves editing, do actually use these articles? Arminden (talk) 07:36, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Self-references

After your revert of my removal of a self-reference on Herodium and your explanation in the edit summary, I had another look at WP:SELFREFERENCE, and decided to open a talkpage discussion. I'd be grateful for your input at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Self-references_to_avoid#Referring_to_other_sections_in_article. Debresser (talk) 10:18, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

I've dealt with it in the article itself. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 17:52, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

You made it better, but see the discussion, and specifically the reference to WP:CLICKHERE, that your edit did not solve all issues. Debresser (talk) 13:46, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Alexander J.

I would like to apologize for my reaction at Alexander J. When I saw that you were the one who reverted me, all I was thinking was the previous edit war we had at/near Christmas, but you started the discussion this time, and I all I did was contradict WP:CIVIL in hopes that the discussion would end ASAP. Jerm (talk) 01:09, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

In case you haven't noticed

[10] and User talk:Khruner#Land of Punt. Doug Weller talk 14:44, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: No, I hadn't detected it. Thank you for your help! (S)he seems a bit over the top in every matter concerning the Horn of Africa. I'll let you police the waves, my WP times will be over for a while, the real world is calling, damn... Till next time, and take care! Arminden (talk) 15:22, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Haaretz

Hi, You can ask me to send you articles from Haaretz but you will get into trouble if you post them here. I suggest you remove it asap. Zero^talk 05:41, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@Zero0000: Hi, and thanks, like always :) Arminden (talk) 10:31, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi

@Zero0000: hi! I haven't heard of you in a while. I've probably pinged you a few times to often, too. I hope you're OK and using the Corona break the best way possible. All the best, and take care! Arminden (talk) 20:51, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Arminden. I'm trying to get some research done but Wikipedia keeps throwing up interesting historical questions that I'm addicted to as you know. Despite being house-bound, I can't keep up. Be safe. Zero^talk 12:54, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Zero0000: Thank you and stay well!Arminden (talk) 13:26, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Collins book

If you want a copy of the book, I'll have one soon in pdf, you can email me. Doug Weller talk 12:13, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: sure I do. I vaguely remember Zero sending me a link or smth about how to email via Wikipedia, but I still don't have a clue and I can't find it. If you don't mind... And if you do ("what the heck...!"), thanks anyway, I very much appreciate you offering. Arminden (talk) 20:19, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

It's a link on the side of an editor's talk page, if they have it enabled, and also at the top of mine. Doug Weller talk 18:24, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Jewish

Hi. Why did you remove the type "Jewish" from the infobox in this edit? On a sidenote, it would be helpful for other editors if you'd use edit summaries. Debresser (talk) 18:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi. First, I think "type" refers to smth. more specific, like right of passage, agricultural, spring festival... Second, it says "Observed by: Jews" right above it. Avoiding overkill. Nothing else, I don't have any intention of passing on Lag BaOmer to the Baptists, Hindus or Sunnis :)

I quote from Template:Infobox holiday:

Type (param "type")	Color
islam, islamic	LightGreen
judaism, juda, jewish, jew	LightSkyBlue
buddhism, buddhist, buddha	PaleGoldenRod
christian, christ, christianity	Lavender
asian, asian festival	RosyBrown
secular	DarkGray
national, international, local, group	LightViolet
historical, cultural, patriotic, ethnic	LightSalmon
pagan	DarkKhaki
commercial	Yellow
hindu, hinduism	Orange
shinto, shintoism	Light red
default	LightSteelBlue

Debresser (talk) 23:06, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi. If you really think "Observed by: Jews. Type: Jewish" makes sense, go ahead. I don't.Arminden (talk) 13:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying. I am talking about something else. Turns out that the "type" parameter is there to change the default color of the infobox. That is all it does. If it were for the informational value, then of course nothing is added by it. Debresser (talk) 12:56, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Debresser: Ah, I see. Then it belongs back in, of course, and sorry. Maybe "Observed by: Jews" can then be left out? It just looks silly. But that's the digital form, repetitive, like one-and-zero, little can be done w/o lots of coding. Thank you for your patience. Maybe you can take a quick look at Kohlit and its talk-page? It's more in your domain. Thanks! Arminden (talk) 13:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Propaganda

The edit summary of this edit is not neutral. Historians also talk about "rule". I don't mind the edit itself, since they are basically synonymous, but the edit summary shows hidden intens that are not purely academic. Debresser (talk) 17:42, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

(Test). Dovid, thanks. This damn phone doesn't work properly, it didn't save my longer answer to you twice already. Arminden (talk) 06:22, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I am watching your talkpage, and will patiently await your longer reply. Debresser (talk) 12:59, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

@Debresser: So, sorry if it upset you. It seems evident that both Jewish-Zionist and Arab-Palestinian nationalists have their favourite historical periods and those they hate, which sometimes even coincide (see Crusader period). "Era" is a grand term, "rule" is suggestive ("it's not their place, but they rule it by force"); "period" is neutral. Zionist historiography used to talk about "Canaanite period" and "Israelite period", terms abandoned in favour of Bronze and Iron Age. The Muslim conquest, Umayyad, Abbasid and Fatimid (sub)periods together form the Early Muslim period, sorry for those allergic to periods in the history of Jerusalem that include "Muslim" in their name. The Crusader period is not much loved by either side. The Mamluk and Ottoman periods are distinct from each other, unless one sees all Muslims as the same old... something. Wherever there still are territories without a universally recognised status, Wiki editors can go by preference or minimal consensus, i.e. try their luck with Jordanian/Israeli rule or period, 'cause neither will make everybody happy. Anyway, historiography is a highly ideological field, and the terminology reflects that. That's what I meant. So yes, sometimes I'm more diplomatic and sometimes less, I apologise if it upset you, and I'll try to hold back a bit more. But what I wrote is pretty much fact - and obvious to anyone. There is a fluid line between hypocrisy and diplomacy. And civility towards intentional reality twisters is sometimes a difficult proposal :) Have a great spring day! Arminden (talk) 13:53, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I wasn't upset, since I agree that "period" is a great term. At the same time, I often see "rule" used as well in history books. The word "rule" is also a fact, not, as some interpret it, a claim for a lack of legitimacy. Debresser (talk) 18:42, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:James Robertson (British - Mount Moriah and the Mosk of Omar - Google Art Project.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:James Robertson (British - Mount Moriah and the Mosk of Omar - Google Art Project.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. CptViraj (talk) 17:06, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gezer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Transjordan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:18, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Shavuot

Not asking for meatpuppetry! But if you need a strong source for kibbutz Shavuot this is it Shalom Lilker,Kibbutz Judaism: A New Tradition in the Making, Associated University Presses, 1982 ISBN 978-0-845-34740-9 pp.192ff. By all means use it as you see fit, or ignore it.

Being me, I couldn't just source the kibbutz section but would adjust defects in the article itself, which has no historical sense (and be reverted immediately of course!)- with not enough given to what we know of the probable earliest form of the festival before rabbinical usage transformed it into a giving of the Torah focus (Tannaitic sages, perhaps simply because Jews no longer had extensive farming communities. downgraded the agrarian motifs-it is the only festival, is it not, which has no tractate devoted to it in the Mishnah). Ironically, the kibbutz adaptation refurbished, imaginatively, a structure closer to the eartiest agricultural version. Best regards Nishidani (talk) 06:28, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nishidani:, hi. No need for the introduction, other than making me look up what the hell meatpuppetry means. I apologise for not dealing with it yet. Lots of real-life chores have piled up and I'm only editing out of habit, compulsively and with a bad conscience, while the topic you offered me requires a clear head and time. I need to read and research about it. Everything religion-related for me is like a foreign language I need to learn first, driven by curiosity and external circumstances, not passion. But what you suggested is an interesting topic and I'll try to deal with it. Sorry for being so slow. Best regards, Arminden (talk) 09:47, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

My apologies rather. Know what you mean: I've been up since 5 am after a 3 hour nap, and am sitting down now at 2.30 or thereabouts, except for 5 minutes at breakfast, to look into wiki, after fastwalking to a supermarket several kms away to shop for relatives, picking up tax returns, buying fishflakes for my pond's denizens, meeting a dental appointment, rushing home to pick two bags of loquats I'd forgotten to cull and take them back to my dentist friend and his nurse as a gift for their reopening, then to the bank to pay a land tax, and a dozen other things.

Don't worry about the ref. I thought you had requested one on that page, can't remember now except that I regretted posting the one I found here. Improper. Yes, religion is weird, utterly strange. It's strange for a pagan like me who, weaned, just sucked thereafter on the tits of Greek myth. I knew they were just so stories from the start, and what made the bible weird was that the structure of the tales was identically mythological but one was expected to believe it really happened. That is deeply enigmatic, at least in the modern world. Chuck the source into the bin if it doesn't cover what your edit aimed for. Best regards Nishidani (talk) 12:36, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Burgoyne

Hi, I need your email-address in order to give you info about the Burgoyne-book, cheers, Huldra (talk) 20:26, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I haven't done that much if at all. DougWeller has recently written me how it's done - a link on the side of an editor's talk page, he said, but I can't identify it (he has added a plain, visible "invitation" at the top of his talk page, that's a different story). I couldn't find it on either my talk page or yours. I'd be happy to share email addresses with you, but not to make mine public. Sorry, you were kind and offered me something nice and useful, and now I bother you with this. Ignore if you wish. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 12:06, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Do you still have the email address you had in July 2019? If so, I can give it to Huldra in private if you give me permission. Zero^talk 17:49, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Zero0000: hi! Yes, still the same. I'd be very grateful, thanks! Arminden (talk) 18:10, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Did you get my email? Huldra (talk) 20:41, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Huldra: hi! Yes, thank you very much indeed. I apologise for not reacting faster, I didn't access it yet, busy with other things, but I really appreciate it. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 13:58, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at WP:AE#Arminden

 You are invited to join the discussion at WP:AE#Arminden. - Makeandtoss (talk) 10:49, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

AE result

Hello. I have closed the AE report with a warning to both of you. Please review closely and observe the instructions in my closing summary. Thank you. El_C 15:19, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

@El C: hi. Acknowledged, all is good. Thanks and have a nice, quiet day, on- as well as offline. Arminden (talk) 15:25, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Where are the Yemenite Torah scrolls on gevil from?

Hi Ehav. Thank you for your great work. You have contributed a photo of Yemenite Torah scrolls (Sfarim Torah) on gevil from "my Beth Knesset", but without explicitly indicating what synagogue that is. Several pages are using the picture, most writing that it's from "Rambam Synagogue in Jerusalem". There is no such synagogue in Jerusalem (Rambam = Moshe ben Maimon, Maimonides), only a quite famous Ramban Synagogue (Ramban = Moshe ben Nachman, Nachmanides). I assumed that one is meant, and have modified the caption to Ramban Synagogue, but I need to have your explicit confirmation, otherwise I need to remove this part of the caption altogether. In your place, I would modify the file name to the specific name of the synagogue, so there's no doubt about it anymore. The better and more precise the caption, the more a picture can be used. Thank you! Arminden (talk) 11:45, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Greetings, this is Ehav Ever. Sorry I didn't notice your post in 2019. I haven't been writing on Wiki for a few years. I also don't remember my original password so I am using this login.

Concerning the Rambam Beith Keneseth. Our Beith Keneseth is in Qatamonim. See pictures below of the location.

בית כנסת רמב"ם בקטמונים

192.56.175.2 :(talk) 06:02, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi. I have learned from a fellow editor, Davidbena, that there is indeed a Yemenite Rambam Synagogue in Jerusalem - in Nahalat Ahim. I am sure that is the one you are going to. Can you please add "Nahalat Ahim" to the caption please? Thank you! The fact is, LOTS of people simply mistake Ramban for Rambam or mistype it, and your synagogue is not very well known, so it can be confusing.
Do you maybe have some details about the age of the scrolls? "200 years old" sounds a bit generic. Thank you! Arminden (talk) 13:00, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

There aren't a lot of details about the scroll. Essentially, it is about 200 years old and was brought from Yemen by Rabbi Mosheh Giyath, probably around 1950's, who was the Rabbi of the Beith Keneseth Rambam until he passed away about 8 years ago. Until he passed away, Rabbi Giyath was one of the last living students of Rabbi Yihhyeh Qafahh. From what I was told by one person was that the sofer of the scroll was from the Sharabi family. That was information I got from the people who were there when I took the picture.192.56.175.2 (talk) 06:02, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Ehav, thanks a lot! Arminden (talk) 07:58, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gihon Spring, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jebus.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 1

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Ramla

added a link pointing to Aqueduct

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: History of Jerusalem during the Early Muslim period has been accepted

History of Jerusalem during the Early Muslim period, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Zoozaz1 (talk) 05:10, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

@Zoozaz1: hi, and thanks again! Sorry to bother, but I'm just a bit confused. Now I want to do a similar action elsewhere, and you wrote that I'm entitled to create a new article without posting a request. That's excellent news, but the link you've kindly indicated is the one I've used already - and the wizard there takes you straight to - applying for a review. So no gain. Or am I missing something? Isn't there a simple link to "create a new article w/o review", I do the work, sign it (4x ~), and it gets published right away? That's how I thought it would go, and that would really be of great help. Thank you! Arminden (talk) 17:00, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
Wait, I think I found something - right underneath the wizard link. I'll try. If it is indeed what I'm looking for, I think it should say explicitly: "for creating a new article without the need for a review". Let's see. Thanks, Arminden (talk) 17:07, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Arminden, I can see how that would be confusing. The way I usually create articles is to look up the article name you want to create in the search bar and then click to create the article in the results from the search. Zoozaz1 (talk) 19:08, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Zoozaz1, great, that's the kind of short access I meant. I'll try it out, thanks! Arminden (talk) 19:28, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

A book

This book by Zvi Shilony has a large amount of detail regarding the Kinneret-Degania area. I have it on paper but I don't know of an electronic access better than snippets. Currently I have urgent work to do that doesn't allow me to review all the relevant articles. Zero^talk 02:01, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you. No problem, really, sorry for bothering, I'm happy you're busy and not just killing time like some of us. Stay healthy and focus on real life. Arminden (talk) 13:42, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Warning

Please do not use Paki (slur) anywhere on Wikipedia. That is not acceptable. El_C 16:15, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

I truly apologise. I only have one British-Pakistani friend, and it's from him & other common friends that I picked up the word. I had no idea. Sorry. Arminden (talk) 16:29, 13 August 2020 (UTC) I see I'm in good (??!!) company: George W. Bush and a bunch of other clueless Americans. I was just clueless, I don't have the excuse of being American (whom did I offend now...?). Warning: here I was trying hard to be funny. The first time I just had no idea. Sorry again. Arminden (talk) 16:35, 13 August 2020 (UTC) @El C: I see you're being funny, too. Quoting Lenin on parliamentarism? That might offend a few people, to. A few million people? Anyway, I'm quite likely to still be in the lead, with >200M Pakistanis. I think I'm in trouble... Arminden (talk) 16:45, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Arminden, I am not interested in engaging in polemics with you at this time. Please stop pinging me. El_C 16:47, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

There's no polemic whatsoever. Allowing myself a joke or two. If not your type of humour, I'll stop. Promise. See, I didn't even ping you this time. Let's stay serious, the world is far too funny a place as it is, let's restore the balance. Arminden (talk) 16:51, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

August 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in David Duke, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Because the title is modified with the word "former", it's properly set in lowercase per MOS:JOBTITLES. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 22:49, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

@Eyer: hi. Go and try to pull the same trick on the Grand Wizard page. Change the formers to lower-case. Good luck. I'm generally against overcapitalisation, but a) I'm not a one-trick dog, and b) I'll always try to help people distinguish between regular common nouns (with or w/o attached adjectives) on one hand, and unusual titles on the other. Your favourite WP rule works well with kings and presidents, but not so much with Grand Wizards. It's too specific, and it consists of a noun and an adjective that can too easily be taken at face value. German has the Duden, French the Academy rules (or laws rather), but English has none of those god-like institutions and guides itself by a certain amount of logic. Not by blindly obeying this or that specific set of more or less arbitrary rules. Bye. Arminden (talk) 23:26, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

PS: go and de-capitalise titles like Shining Star of Paektu Mountain. I hope you know where to look for it. Arminden (talk) 23:47, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Primary sources

I noticed that you were one of the editors adding links to biblical verses, like at Amorites (Special:Diff/953658303). While these can be helpful, they are primary sources for Wikipedia, where secondary sources should be used for any interpretation or commentary. If you know scholarly secondary sources that could be cited there, those would be most helpful. Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 05:07, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@PaleoNeonate: hi. I think you got me wrong. I'm only adding wikilinks to verses already quoted, or move them from footnotes (which are wrong; I've been told it's an outdated practice used many years ago), to inline links. So basically exactly in line with what you are saying. Have a nice Sunday! Arminden (talk) 07:28, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't contest it, the invitation to find/add secondary sources is still on. —PaleoNeonate – 03:54, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Publisher of Ramla

In Special:Diff/974494694, you put that the publisher of Ramla is both "Carta for the Israel Exploration Society" and "Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA)". Which of these is correct? Currently, only the latter is showing up in the article. Jackmcbarn (talk) 17:19, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jackmcbarn: hi, and thanks! It's a leftover from a previous edit, much of the article didn't have almost any details re. the sources and I tried to add all that's relevant. The IAA website is reproducing the Carta content, so it's Carta via IAA website. It was quite clear from the context & quoted website, but still a mistake. I've fixed it now, thanks for drawing my attention. Arminden (talk) 17:29, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Note to self

When you see "Supreme Deliciousness" - f...f...f...f...f...f...f oh, no, no Tourette's again, please... - run! Don't try reason, logic, arguments, reference to IQ (I-What?!), common sense, real life... Run! Don't curse, don't exhaust your knowledge of expletives, don't bother to fix the world... run. And don't ever forget again. Arminden (talk) 15:42, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Or you could ask other editors to help. Debresser (talk) 22:19, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Wow, here you are! How did you find this? Thanks, much appreciated, but really, it's not worth the hassle. Arminden (talk) 22:08, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

I am your friendly talkpage stalker. Debresser (talk) 01:50, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

@Debresser: hi. If you wish to - go for it. I sure as hell won't. Considering the possible/probable synagogue found there, to mention that the Byzantine period corresponds to the Jewish (maybe give up: Israeli) "Mishnaic and Talmudic periods" is absolutely relevant and legitimate. But don't blame me if... Cheers, Arminden (talk) 21:06, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

I agree with his removal, not his reason. being a bit "Israel-centric", as he calls it, is normal on an article about the Golan Heights and discussing a synagogue. However, the Mishnah was closed around 200 CE and the Gemara around 500 CE, so a synagogue that was build around 500 can not be called Mishnaic and hardly Talmudic. Debresser (talk) 17:59, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Um

	The 四海之內皆兄弟 Barnstar
	For your trenchantly erudite toponymic tolutiloquence over Silwan/Siloam, making some stillwan greymatter light up with much needed hyperthermic illumination Nishidani (talk) 08:11, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Anarchism

Hi Arminden,

I saw your work on articles related to anarchism and wanted to say hello, as I work in the topic area too. If you haven't already, you might want to watch our noticeboard for Wikipedia's coverage of anarchism, which is a great place to ask questions, collaborate, discuss style/structure precedent, and stay informed about content related to anarchism. Take a look for yourself!

And if you're looking for other juicy places to edit, consider expanding a stub, adopting a cleanup category, or participating in one of our current formal discussions.

Feel free to say hi on my talk page and let me know if these links were helpful (or at least interesting). Hope to see you around. czar 02:40, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Dobry den' to the @Czar:! Great sense of humour in choosing the nickname. I truly thank you for your trust, but I'm afraid that my brush with the topic didn't go beyond Sholem Schwarzbard, and a bit on the Spanish Civil War and Emma Goldman. It's an interesting philosophy, of which I should know more, but that's better suited for a very long 'to do' list than for my immediate plans. Sorry, thank you, and keep up the good work. Arminden (talk) 19:10, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

"Gugumani" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Gugumani. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 23#Gugumani until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:31, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

To editor Rosguill: ouch, just wrote a message on your page. It's there. It's getting funny, I had actually forgotten about it, and I never thought it would implicate more than a bot or, at the most, one resourceful editor to bump into it and remove it w/o delay. A bottle that slipped into the ocean, kind of. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 18:17, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Arminden, gotcha, although you put the message on my user page instead of my user talk page. I'll go through and WP:G7 delete it in a bit. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:20, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Nahala

Hi Arminden, I have removed the references from Nahala because WP:DABREF clearly states that references are not used on DAB pages, and now that there is an article for Nahalat Binyamin, the references can go there. Leschnei (talk) 23:39, 3 October 2020 (UTC) @Leschnei: hi, and thanks! I had parked all these references here while preparing to write the article, and then I forgot about it. Good you saw it. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 02:55, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Street of the Prophets

Hi, the Bikur Cholim Hospital buildings now have huge lettering identifying them as branches of Shaare Zedek Medical Center. We cannot call the former German Hospital building part of today's Bikur Cholim Hospital. Perhaps this caption can be worded: Nighttime exterior of the former German Hospital, today a branch of Shaare Zedek Medical Center. Yoninah (talk) 16:06, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm updating the picture so you can see the new wording. Yoninah (talk) 16:07, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

@Yoninah:, wait! Bikur Cholim is now part of the Sha'arei Tzedek chain! So no need to change anything. The name Bikur Cholim remains, as do the historical names Deaconesses (Diakonissen) or German Hospital, and Ziv Hospital. Arminden (talk) 16:30, 4 October 2020 (UTC) ::@Yoninah: Or whatever. People and guide books are not running with the official name changes. Gaydamak came and went, now it's Sha'arei Tzedek, but the old names stick. As long as they are both in, everybody's happy. Thanks! Arminden (talk) 16:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

OK with me. BTW the Bikur Cholim Hospital article needs some serious updating on the ownership change. Yoninah (talk) 16:58, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

To editor Yoninah: Fine with me. I'm more interested in history :) As I thought, now it's "Eduardo and Jovita Cojab Building" in the "City Center Campus". Names over names nobody ever cares about. American mania. Don't think we should try to keep up with it. With substantial stuff, yes. Did the Cojabs finance a new department? Then yes. Otherwise it's endless. Shame for the much prettier night picture. The reason Santa Claus became so famous is because of the story of how he helped out WITHOUT making a fuss, without letting people know who's been the benefactor. Not quite the Safra, Cojab,... etc. style. But as long as they help, not hinder, let them put their names wherever they please. Arminden (talk) 17:07, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Really? I never liked the night picture (it was the only time I could take it) and was excited to update it in the daytime. It's still on Wikimedia Commons. Yoninah (talk) 17:08, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

To editor Yoninah: De gustibus :) So both are yours? Congrats! Arminden (talk) 17:25, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Would you like to offer your knowledge to the Begin Sadat Center for Strategic Studies

User:Arminden Since you were the first to notice the article and offered some objections before , now there is a serious Talk about the article , you can join if you are interested to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Begin%E2%80%93Sadat_Center_for_Strategic_Studies , Thank YouAleviQizilbash (talk) 11:08, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

To editor AleviQizilbash: Hi. Thank you for offering, but I honestly won't have the motivation to deal with it. I'm happy that I've put a discussion in motion, this institution seems quite dangerous to me, as it is using authors with impressive CVs, but with a very clear tendency and is hiding behind two names, Begin and Sadat, of which they are clearly representing only one - Begin. Sadat must be turning in his grave every time they're publishing an article using his name in the letterhead. I find it ugly (disingenuous, manipulative, cowardly, pick your word) to hide behind names misleading the public, so no matter if I do agree with their work or not, I think they should be at least kept in check where we can. But it's one crusade too many for me, sorry. If I come across a concrete article where they intersect with a topic I'm working on, then yes. Thank you very much for your invitation and good luck, Arminden (talk) 15:08, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Azzopardi

Hello. Your recent edit to Azzopardi appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 07:13, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Astounding (and assumed accidental) alliteration: Arjayay addresses Arminden about Azzopardi. EEng 07:19, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@Arjayay: hi! Arjayay, I personally don't think P.P. Azzopardi is a remarkable sculptor, but the Maltese seem to take some pride in his work and an editor has added the picture of a statue of his to the John the Baptist article, with a red link for the artist. After seeing that (and moving the picture to a less prominent position on the page, as it was set next to da Vinci and Piero della Francesca), I added him to the list. Which list is a "local patriotism" statement for all intents and purposes, with articles on a football player who "also played 10 times for a Maltese FA XI, a few years before Malta played his first official international game" and alike. Perfectly legitimate, not every nation has a Maradona - or da Vinci, nor should they. If you insist on Wiki rules & regulations about disamb. pages not containing red links - I totally disagree, they help motivate editors to write articles, and offer a more complete picture on the topic for everybody. For me it was extremely interesting to see in how many countries and in how many domains this family or group of families have ended up living and working. You took out a 19th-century Maltese sculptor, a Maltese youth athlete, and a Canadian actress, citing indisputable Wiki rules. I have no intention of fighting over this.

@Arjayay and EEng: As to the alliteration, it's definitely the best thing that came out of this whole matter :)) Arminden (talk) 14:59, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Apparently Arminden appreciates astounding alliteration. EEng 18:22, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Look what I found: A famous Maltese sculptor, and it's of course about our friend Pietro Paolo Azzopardo (1791-1875). Full of superlatives and pride. With 400k inhabitants and a diaspora of something over 300k people, I bet they're having a hard time producing sufficient Wiki editors as to write all the articles they consider worthwhile publishing. Arminden (talk) 15:15, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

To editor EEng: Every English ear enjoys extraordinary expressions. Every English ear?! Every ear! Arminden (talk) 17:13, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Evidently. EEng 20:51, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

TofD

Hello, Arminden. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

05:26, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Your question at the Help desk

	Hello Arminden. Replies have been posted to your question at the Help desk. If the problem is solved, please place {{Resolved|1=~~~~}} at the top of the section. Thank you!
	Message added on 15:42, 2 November 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{helpdeskreply}} template.

the (so-called) Map of the Kingdom of Chalcis

Hi Arminden, I gave a response to your question about the map of the kingdom of chalcis on my user talk page on the Dutch Wikipedia (here). Because your question dates from several months back - I haven't been able to be on much lately - I thought it was a good idea to bring it to your attention here. (Please let us continue the conversation on my talk page on the Dutch Wikipedia.) —Preceding undated comment added 13:26, 5 November 2020 (UTC) not really autosigned; so I'm adding it: Machaerus (talk) 13:26, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Empty rcat shell note and suggest archiving

{{Redirect category shell}} should only be applied to a redirect empty if "you want to learn how to categorize redirects. For editors who want to learn how to categorize redirects, this template is a learning tool. Only those editors who intend to return to the redirect to learn which rcats to use should apply this template without parameters."

— Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 17:55, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

@Godsy: hi. I have no idea what you're talking about. What "Redirect category shell"? I'm not technically interested beyond a minimum that allows me to edit, mainly history- and geography-related articles. I don't appreciate receiving automatic bot messages. Have a nice day, Arminden (talk) 13:59, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

You placed an empty {{redirect category shell}} on at least 9 of the redirect pages you recently created, i.e. Abigail, Mount Hebron, Hebron hills, Hever Stream, Khirbet Ma'in, Mount of Olives Jewish cemetery, Nira Stone, Nisan Bak Synagogue, PEF rock, and South Hebron Hills, which together comprise half of the items within the maintenance category CAT:MISCR. When that list potentially gets unintentionally flooded, individuals who actually want to learn about redirect categorization experience much higher wait times before they receive guidance. That aside, I am not a bot and my message was not sent nor compiled by one. Best regards, — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 06:49, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

@Godsy: hi, and thank you for your reply. You sound nothing like a bot. The first message kind of did, that's where my first reply came from. I've only started to use redirects and have went to the Teahouse to ask for advice. As I mentioned, I'm not technically ambitious, I wrote that there too, but still, some of the very kind advice I got there, as well as your very nice & personalised reply, went a few leagues above my deeply submersed head. I have piles of things to read in areas I'm really interested in (of which WP is also likely to profit), plus a real-world life, so when it comes to technical advice I'm always asking for pre-chewed, installation wizard-type instructions. After all, WP is a group enterprise: I'm doing my bit, and everyone else is welcome to add nuances and the required fine-tuning. This doesn't mean that I'm OK with making mistakes. And the advice I've got seemed to say that I need to add "Redirect category shell" to the one-liner "#REDIRECT (name of existing article)". (These are my notes I'm reproducing here. I took notes and I'm going back to them when I'm using a piece of code, or template or whatever it's called, that I need). I couldn't figure out why the "shell" thing is needed, so I got suspicious and only used it in the beginning, but then gave up on it. It seems that I should forget about it altogether. Btw, I'm as little familiar with what that means as I'm with the "CAT:MISCR" you're mentioning. So "#REDIRECT (name of existing article)" and finito. Got it, thanks for taking away my last doubt. Do you think you've managed to eliminate all the cases where I've mistakenly used that "shell" thing? Or shall I go and look for more? Sorry for the fully unintended mistake, and thank you for tiding up after me and for your advice. Best regards, Arminden (talk) 07:26, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

The function of the shell template is explained well at WP:REDCAT. Any other cases where the shell was applied empty would show up in CAT:MISCR, thus no further action is needed in that regard and I appreciate what you did already. No worries or apologies necessary, I only started this discussion here to prevent the potential problem from proliferating any further. On an aside, I would be happy to help if you would like assistance setting up an archive system for your talk page (to preserve old discussions on talk subpages and make the page easier to navigate & load) or have any other questions about technical matters. Warmest regards, — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 12:34, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Vandal?

@Zero0000: sorry, I think I found the official page. Have a great day, Arminden (talk) 14:28, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Antisemitic canard

I know that you were trying to have fun while reverting a pathetic hate-filled person, but don't you think that your edit summary might have been a little excessive, especially when viewed out of context? It's a feature of Wikimedia software that many things can be edited, but the summaries of past edits cannot be, so you'll have to live with them indefinitely... AnonMoos (talk) 12:42, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

AnonMoos, hi and thank you. You have shown to have all the delicacy and diplomacy I have opted out of in that edit summary, by writing to me in the first place, and then by the way you chose your words. I thank you for that. In a less locked-down context I would most likely have done differently, and maybe there's a bit of a hidden wish to be blocked out of what has become a dependance and compulsion. As for the disgusting, anonymous creature behind the edits I have reverted - I only regret maybe giving him the satisfaction of becoming personal. In real life one can hope for enlightenment, reeducation, etc., but in the anonymity of the online world, the trolls & their ilk are Scot-free. I can live with that edit summary. As you might have noticed, I didn't remove a comment on this talk-page called "Your hostility and bigotry are showing, Arminden" (2015) because I still stand behind my answer from back then, although today I would have held back with the comment that provoked it, and altogether with much more than I did back then. Today was out of the ordinary. Anyway, sarcasm is the one thing left before desperation, and it is a form of humour; and humour is the best medicine and last resort when no real remedy is left. Thanks again, and have a great day. Arminden (talk) 13:12, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Nishi

I've never known my friend Arminden to 'loose the thread'. He's a highly focused guy. So, this seams like needling. I'm sure things can be patched up. Someone needs to make amends. Nishidani (talk) 21:27, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Haganah

Could you add sources to this content? I'm sure there are plenty of books dealing with this, but I'm not familiar with the topic.--80.246.140.72 (talk) 13:20, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

@80.246.140.72: Hi. Thank you for your confidence, but I don't have any books on the topic, so anyone can do it by researching online. I'll try, but can't promise, sorry. Arminden (talk) 22:27, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Water castle

Hi Arminden, just to let you know that, although I've reverted your recent edits under the WP:BRD rule, I've reinstated most of them in good faith as they weren't linked to the title issue and I actually agree that they improve the article. Bermicourt (talk) 14:00, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Yarmuk/Yarmouk River

I declined the speedy deletion of Yarmuk River to make way for the move because both forms are frequently used in English-language sources and so the move is not uncontroversial. Please use WP:RM instead. Fences&Windows 23:33, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Khan al-Ahmar

We generally don't disambiguate things unless we need to. There is no other target for Khan al-Ahmar so it should not be disambiguated with (village). nableezy - 04:02, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

@Nableezy:, hi. I hope you don't mind if I move this to the actual talk-page for this topic. Thanks and see you there. Arminden (talk) 04:29, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

yeah i saw your comment there, made a brief reply. thanks, nableezy - 04:33, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Arminden,

You put a CSD tag on this page stating you had a disambiguation page to move there but you didn't link to the page you wanted to move. Please provide a link to the disambiguation page that you want moved. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:43, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

​Liz, hi and thank you! It's all, discussion + material for new disamb. page, at Talk:Khan al-Ahmar (village)#Added "(village)" to the name. I am not well-skilled in background technical issues, did my best, maybe CSD isn't the right tag, but I only know about 2 or 3 options and this one came closest.

The new "Khan al-Ahmar" disambiguation page still needs to be created - as written, it's fully ready to go, but I cannot create it until the redirect (Khan al-Ahmar leading to Khan al-Ahmar (village)), is removed. Can you please help with that? I've tried at Teahouse too (here), with no luck yet. Thank you! Arminden (talk) 03:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Arminden. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 19:15, 27 April 2021 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Your Opinion

There is a discussion on Talk:Revelry of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai which I think you may be interested in seeing.Davidbena (talk) 12:11, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

@Davidbena: hi. Thanks, let's see, I wonder if I actually do have an opinion on it :) Arminden (talk) 12:27, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Rabat (disambiguation)

Hi Armiden, I appreciate all of the hard work that you have put into understanding the etymology and usage of Rabat (and related words), but the fact remains that DAB pages are simply navigation pages for existing information, Like the index of a book, DAB pages shouldn't contain content that isn't first presented in an article. If you're too busy to write articles, you could edit the Rabat/rabat Wiktionary pages and direct readers there until an article is written. In the meantime, I've added a link to Arabat Fortress which includes the word origin. Leschnei (talk) 12:21, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Leschnei. It might be a good idea, I have never edited on Wiktionary. I'm not so fond of it, maybe that's why. Not sure users like to click around either. Anyway, you hit the nail on its head, but probably not from the direction you intended: "like the index of a book" - well, the book (WP article) isn't there yet, but the DAB page is, and there is no divine law that says ""Thou shall never put information on the DAB page!" So spake He, listened to His own words, and found them good and unshakable." I can't understand for the life of me what bothers you when you see half a line of useful info at the head of the DAB page. It's beyond me. WP isn't an obstacle race where one has to navigate the holy gates, strangled by a straitjacket. It never was intended to work like that, nor does it make any sense to approach it like this. The WP guidelines explicitly stress it: make WP better for the user, and all the rest is secondary. We make the guidelines, not the other way 'round. Rules are something else: don't vandalise, respect your fellow editors, don't be sloppy and disruptive. But that's common sense. An encyclopedia is about offering information in the most useful and user-friendly way possible. That requires study, understanding, synthesis, and bringing it over in a concise & articulate way. The rest is chess, slalom, yo-yo, and other unrelated sports & games. But so what, crusades & Don Quixote are out of fashion. Even in mathematics, one can solve a problem in an elegant way, win the olympiad and be called a mathematician; or learn by heart the algorithm taught by Miss Teacher and pass the test with 100 points, and that's that. We can all learn from each other, mainly how to make the articles better for the user. Respecting every obscure guideline - no, I don't see the benefit. Have a great day, Arminden (talk) 13:15, 5 May 2021 (UTC) PS: I don't know yet how the root r-b-t first gave the meanings "great" (see title of goddess in Ugarit), then the meaning "royal city" or "capital", "fortified city" (see Rabbat Amon/Moab), and later in Arabic "suburb". Or maybe it's r-b-b-t and r-b-t, which fully disconnects the two? I can of course see a possible logical chain of steps, but that's not knowing, and I couldn't find the missing links in online sources. That's something essential and still missing in the article. Popular etymologies are dangerous, as are poor sources. If you found something reliable on that, I would more than welcome it. Don't want to feel like I'm just collecting material, like those poor devils posting thousands of Iranian hamlets and clogging English WP with an avalanche of useless stubs. On the other hand, one learns how many places there are named after ribats and qalats, so maybe it's not totally useless. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 13:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Reality check: de jure vs. de facto

Note to myself: see here for my view on this topic. Arminden (talk) 09:31, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

• User contributions
• Recent changes
• Watchlists
• Revision diffs
• IRC channels
• Related changes
• New pages list
• Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! EpicPupper (talk) 22:38, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

May 2021

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

EpicPupper (talk) 18:02, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Al-Auja

You got your deletion.©Geni (talk) 22:30, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Geni, thank you! Arminden (talk) 07:33, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm impressed by your writing. It has this 'ethos', nay 'pathos' to it. It is certainly concise, direct, eloquent.

I agree with many things you write. They bring up strong empathies and sympathies in my mind. I just wanted to say that I completely agreed with you when you wrote "I hated "Schindler's List" because of its shallowness...," and the remainder of your paragraph there. It was all a good read for me. Thanks, warshy ^(¥¥) 18:16, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

warshy, thank you, I'm just conscious that Wikipedia isn't the place to let it out. Nishidani is an exception in several ways, but with others I've lost any semblance of coolness, and probably civility too. I need to move on. There's a way people tend to play and tease with what's not really their right to do so. There is so much to do about tribal blindness among Israelis, Palestinians, and the rest of the Middle East. Pushing the one or the other into the corner, siding with whoever touches the strings of one's soul without understanding that it's not about applauding during a theatre play, but about life and death in the end, that does upset me and I'm letting it out in words, because there are no deeds at my disposal. You can try to educate and open eyes, but fully delegitimising "the other" is both mean – and stupid, because it's counterproductive. Pretending that placing the depopulated former Palestinian village in the lead of every article about any Israeli town or village, and posting an old map with the Arab names more prominently than any picture or information about the Israeli place as such, is the exact mirror image of Israelis obliterating and ignoring any memory of Arab presence. That's not how it's done. Inform and educate, most definitely; but people on all sides need to be allowed to live in a decent way, and you don't ever reach that by calling everybody a thief and erasing their pride in anything they've achieved. I'm wishing everybody well, and while contact is good and a must, as it opens one's eyes, a healthy distance should be possible for those who really don't belong together. But I'm back to writing while I was trying do do something else too. Still, I'm happy you wrote, and your discrete presence in the background has been encouraging and brought up a smile every time you've tapped me. Take care Warshy. Arminden (talk) 19:15, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

I agree. The most baffling part of it for me is that there seems to be no viable solution, no solution at all, actually. But your writing does help make the problem more acute, more sensible, all around. In the absence of better hope, that is at least something... You take care too, and I hope you do get soon to all the other stuff you need to do, besides writing. Thanks, warshy ^(¥¥) 19:31, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Templates documentation

Regrets for not answering sooner - a few distractions in play the past while. However, in general you can (usually) get some documentation for a template by looking at its template page (usually Template: followed by the template name)- Thus {{COI}} (or Template:COI) includes the description on the purpose and usage of the Conflict of Interest banner. Same goes with other templates you may be interested in e.g. {{No footnotes}}. Some are visible banners, often requests for cleanup or action; others are ongoing markers rather than cleanup, such as {{EngvarB}}. Hope this leads to the info you are interested in. Dl2000 (talk) 20:45, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@Dl2000: hi. Thank you very much for writing back, but could it be that there's some confusion at play? I had asked about the meaning and benefit of placing "use my dates" above an articleTemplate:use my dates doesn't seem to lead anywhere. . I'm technically not well-versed, nor very interested, but I saw it so many times and don't know anything about it. Sorry... Arminden (talk) 20:58, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

hi

Please see Talk:Kfar Ahim#RfC: Arab vs. Palestinian?, and undo this; thanks, Huldra (talk) 23:02, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't care about those tonnes of blabla. I won't revert whatever you do. Enjoy your crusade. Arminden (talk) 23:15, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Sigh, I am really not on a crusade (and I really don't think it is very nice of you to say so), But heck: this is wikipedia and "rules are rules" -whether we like them or not. Please revert, or risk finding yourself at WP:AE, Huldra (talk) 23:33, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

@Huldra:, I've written quite clearly: you can do as you like, I'm out of there, it's all yours. I've removed the star from that article, not getting any more notice when it's being changed. Arminden (talk) 07:48, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Note

this, Huldra (talk) 23:56, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Syrian Arc

Hi Arminden, it took me a while to get started, but there is now an article on the Syrian Arc. It's still very much work in progress as I get my head around the large number of papers on the subject.

One question, I've mentioned that it runs through Israel/Palestine, but only linked Israel. Is there a link for Palestine that I could use without leading to potential conflict? Thanks, Mikenorton (talk) 14:56, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Mike, hi and thanks for letting me know. Yes, you're so right! A can of worms. I'm trying to get Wiki-"clean" lately, not least because of this. Try "West Bank" (I guess Gaza/the coast is too far west to be much affected), or [[Palestine (region)|Palestine]]. Somebody will always change it to "State of Palestine" (I wish there were one, but it ain't, so it's wishful thinking and factually wrong), others will change it back and so on. But don't let it bother you, concentrate on the geology. Maybe they won't find the page, except maybe because of our dialogue here :) Good luck and thanks again, I'm hurrying now to read your article. Arminden (talk) 16:26, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Done. See if you agree (region = actually both, Pal. Territories + Isr., but OK...). Arminden (talk) 16:29, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the improvements! Mikenorton (talk) 21:46, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

If anyone tampers with Palestine (region)|Palestine revert them.Nishidani (talk) 22:27, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

A) Listen to Nishi, he knows his business. B) Quite the contrary, thank _you_! Arminden (talk) 11:51, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Re: Talk:Weekly Torah portion What happens on the 55th week?

Hi, I saw your post from last year about the 55th week of the year and the discrepancy between weeks and available sedrot. With this year being a leap year, it puzzled me. The answer is that because of Jewish holidays and Chol Hamoed falling on Shabbat, there will always be enough sedrot available to complete the year's cycle without the need to add an extra one. Have a look at Yom Tov Torah readings. EhsanQ ^(talk) 11:27, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict...please fill out my survey?

Hello :) I am writing my MA dissertation on Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and I noticed that you have contributed to those pages. I will be looking at the process of collaborative knowledge production on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the effect it has on bias in the articles. This will involve understanding the profiles and motivations of editors, contention/controversy and dispute resolution in the talk pages, and bias in the final article.

For more information, you can check out my meta-wiki research page, where I will be posting my findings when I am done.

I would greatly appreciate if you could take 5 minutes to fill out this quick survey before 8 AUGUST 2021!

Thanks so much,

Sarabnas (talk) 19:08, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Your contributions

Arminden, I have noted your positive contributions in Wikipedia articles, and you have even tried to improve the article City of David. Have you seen that article lately? See, for example, Talk:City of David#Recent editing. Do you think that the article is being accurately portrayed historically? How would you suggest that we improve the article?Davidbena (talk) 11:42, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Davidbena: hi David. Honestly, I've lost interest and I hope not to change my mind in the future. This is a working place, and an unpaid one. Even one on which your whole livelyhood depends, you tend to leave if it becomes unbearable. Here it's toxic, through and through. It's a nasty battlefield, and not of the minds. The article, as it is, is hardly deserving to be left online. Hacked, messy, like Waterloo after the battle: a participant knows every explosion crater and torn tree in the area he's been in, but a visitor only gets the impression of a pockmarked landscape. What does a user need? Who comes here? This should be the only motivational questions an editor should keep in mind - this, and the BIG PICTURE. Instead it's war on all levels, small-minded and on tiny units. One could have a separation: a list of things you can see there, with a glossary for the terms used (SE hill = CoD, Tyropoeon = Central Valley, etc.); a mainstream way of interpreting the lot; other particular interpretations; and clearly, a presentation of the ideological & political powers at work, which influence (and complicate) everything a lot. But not constantly and repetitively and small-mindedly and aggressively and idiotically intertwined to the point where it all becomes useless to any presumed user. As it is now. Not a battle I want to be in anymore. Sorry. Arminden (talk) 16:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Arminden's summary captures indeed the state of things, David. While it is undoubtedly true that the ìtoxicity' reflects clashes in editorial bias, or the difference in their respective points of departure (reflecting the tensions of the I/P conflict), the core issue is not here, but in the nature of the riven antagonisms present in the scholarly interpretation of that period. You will have both read the Haaretz article today. My eye caught the following in particular:-

There have been screaming matches at conferences and now, in the academic equivalent of pistols at dawn, volleys of arguments are being exchanged in scholarly journals, with the latest article by Ben-Yosef being published earlier in July (Ariel David King David a Nomad? New Theory Sparks Storm Among Israeli Archaeologists Haaretz 26 July 2021)

It is not wikipedians' bad faith at the root of this kind of hodgypodgy mishmash we have in articles like that, as much as the fact that editors end to sieve the alluvium of riven controversies within Israel and abroad among members of the relevant academic community, and pick and choose from the disiecta membra of papers, esp. reports on them, to consolidate one POV or undermine the other.

So even if we just detached ourselves, mastered the archaeological record and, as would be desirable, agreed to write a minimalist account of what the material evidence states about that period, we would still have a tension between the hermeneutics of the two camps in RS, the 'religious-confirmatory' and 'secular-sceptical' schools. At the moment editing is just prinking and preening the corpse. The only positive way through would be to outline on that talkpage a structure for rewriting from top to bottom - with the sparse ashlar masonry of the most modern archaeological findings re the site. But on Wikipedia this never happens. Alas.Nishidani (talk) 17:10, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, Arminden has expressed in such exemplary terms the difficulties in editing when different "ideological forces" are at play. It's frustrating, at times, and it can wear a person out. I understand his sentiments. @Nishidani:, your suggestion is also a good one. Perhaps you can help out in that area. I have no problem whatsoever about mentioning "a mainstream way of interpreting the lot," as well as mentioning "other particular interpretations," so long as we give due weight to the mainstream view.Davidbena (talk) 18:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I can't help. At a certain point one has to measure what time one has against the maelstrom of time-sinks, and navigate in quieter waters. In any case, for me the deep past is a congeries of hypotheses and just-so stories, and should be written as such, even when, over 80 articles you have the United monarchy meme when there is no evidence for such a thing. Nishidani (talk) 19:45, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Nishidani: hi. I couldn't agree more - to this last posting more than to the previous. David and you have lured me out of my hermit's corner after quite a while of staying away. I've been weak lately altogether at letting the old habit take over again, but at least not by wading through the I/P can of worms. To the first posting I agree less because the archaeologists' theories can be presented one underneath the other, but the screams of "politically correct" activists adding to each term or statement a preamble and postscript longer than a UN resolution's, truly make the lecture unbearable - which, I am fully convinced, often is the very purpose of their editing. Allergy, you can call it (theirs, I mean), and a worse case than the medical variant. Antihistamines don't help, and desensitisation is refused as "normalisation". I'm not talking in general, just look again at the CoD article: repetition over repetition, just to make sure that any user who only reads one paragraph will still know "how much we disagree", from the ground up, roots, stem and all.

ElAd/CoD as an organisation is as disgusting as your next propagandist, who's lying in your face and knowingly distorting information. And ultimately destroying lives, not just people's trust in reason and any kind of "authorities". But they're not alone. Arrogant Palestinian village kids kicking passersby's dogs ('cause what's a dog other than a means to the goal, and a dirty one at that?), hateful activists of every shade making anything resembling normalcy impossible - that place is nasty. And it reflects in the "article". Archaeologically it's an amazing place, everyone should be happy to see what lies underneath, and if in a parallel universe ideology & politics could be held out of it, the Palestinians should (and I hope they would, but hard to know) love to participate in digging it out, as should anyone who asked himself a theoretical question. In any normal country there are ways to pursue major projects, including by resettling a few households. There is no long history of living on that ridge in recent times. I'd have zero problem with the UN taking over, the UNESCO leading the digs, the few families living in the houses which stand on top of this treasure trove being offered alternative housing wherever they want, and the digs taking the normal scientific form, from the surface towards the living rock, and not through tunnels. The results could bring jobs to the neighbourhood (if tourists do ever come back), all eras being treated with the same concern, and that's that. But it's more likely for Jesus or some cousin of his having their 1st or 2nd coming tomorrow with the 5:30 bus from Tel Aviv, Bethlehem or Hebron, than anything remotely close to that happening. And the article will look accordingly.

I don't care if David was there, if Solomon existed, if the fortress only protected the spring or if it was indeed the walled city of Jebus and later of David: curiosity might have killed the cat, but it's one of the better traits we have. Neither religions, nor someone's rights do depend on who exactly dug a hole or raised a wall centuries or millennia ago in this place or that. If they indeed do, they're not worth the effort. Neither is it for me fighting these disingenuous WP wars. If I'll need the information in a concise manner and always available, that might motivate me do do something - or to finally switch from desktop to laptop and always have my own files with me. But doing that earlier would have stopped me from getting to know you, and to be forced to adapt my views to other people's, which - to a point! - is a good thing. So here on WP as anywhere else, the "militants" are destroying something good and valuable. (Btw, what do you think of the BBC reporting that in Tokio they held a minute of silence for the Munich attack in which Israeli athletes "were killed by gunmen"? What ever happened to the word "terrorist"? If that's what conforming to PC rules means, f-u-c-k i-t, and if WP goes the same way, may it go the way of the dodo.)

"The user" I keep on invoking is such a passive mass! There's no revolt of those looking up this presumed article, the talk page should be chock full of "letters to the editors" full of expletives. But it's always the same ole' suspects, with the same ole' biases and fix ideas. So, who are we spending all this time & energy on? Is it just about all of us editors being from Al Bundy's wife's family? (That's me trying not to get X-rated). Unpleasant thought, but impossible to chase away. Arminden (talk) 21:13, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I don't want to drag you back into those articles, rest assured, precisely because you are one of the best editors we have there, and you need to stay clear of timesinks and just occasionally dump what you know in one or two selected articles. Yes, those men at Munich were terrorists, not a shadow of a doubt. I strongly disagreed, and continue to do so, with the 2012 Olympics one minute of silence campaign as the talk pages will show, while knowing that the plaintiff would win through sometime in the future as they have. I regard most army men who are recruited as snipers in non-defensive wars as murderers, indeed terrorists enjoying one of the perks, as 'natural born killers' (about 5% of any army), of giving vent to their pleasure in killing people under an official and unimputable state warrant as opposed to our usual designation of terrorists as violent non-state 'actors'. I think in fact that it is probably easier to penetrate into the mind of those political terrorists than into the minds of official murderers. I regard many respectable and, on the face of it, decent people, as murderers (When the 2014 'reforms' on heating subsidies and national health went through in England under Cameron, I think the 2016 statistics showed that over the Ist year of their implementation, the expected annual figures for dying jumped up with an extra 15,000 above the expected average, and some sociological analysis at the time suggested the leap in deaths among the age was a direct consequence of those reforms, ergo . . .) But, let's not stray there. These are very stressful times and from whatever angle, have very little to recommend for themselves since the default principle is 'who's side are you on'. My best friend (now deceased) once said to me: 'if the (Italian) Communist Party comes to power (he voted for it, for solid family reasons connected to the fascist period) I'll have no option but to become a militant member of the opposition,' and I think I can recall Kafka noting he was his own best or worst adversary. Late here. Must catch up with the Olympic late night roundup. Keep well and look after yourself, mate. Nishidani (talk) 22:52, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Arminden: and @Nishidani:, if either one of you should need any encouragement and/or motivation to work only on the lead paragraph, I think you have the authority to do so by this Administrator. See her remarks here. Be well.Davidbena (talk) 02:11, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Tiles ( for 37.142.172.72)

@37.142.172.72: hi, no problem. I've replied on the History of Palestine talk-page. Hope you see this. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 15:52, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

FYI

FYI Sarabnas is a her not a him. Onceinawhile (talk) 19:12, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Good for you ;) Arminden (talk) 00:36, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Redirection

Hi, it appears that you tried to create a redirect at Zacharias (given name), but didn't do it correctly. I've fixed it now. For future reference, the correct redirect syntax is:

#REDIRECT [[target page name]]

You can check redirects with the Preview button before saving them. If you have created a working redirect, the preview will show the name of the target page alongside a bent arrow (or "Redirect to:" label in text mode). — Smjg (talk) 00:39, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

@Smjg: Hi, and thanks for the correction. I am well aware of the redirect template and the preview option, it was just a typo and work done in a hurry. Thank you for fixing it and for drawing my attention! Cheers, Arminden (talk) 01:20, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

An opportunity to be proven a dickhead

Hey, A. I'm guessing that what is transcribed as 'keida' is Calicotome villosa/spiny broom, and even glossing that looks like WP:OR. Still devilish details like that leave me sleepless. Can you provide me with a soporific illumination without you too losing any sleep? Thanks. Nishidani (talk) 13:05, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@Nishidani: Hey back, and thanks for your trust, but I'm not good at anything relating to plants or Hebrew. If you're asking if spiny broom is 'keida' in Hebrew: wildflowers.co.il has קידה שעירה, "hairy bow" (says Google), and Steven Morse offers KIDH SHAIRH, KIDH SAIRH. So 'keida[h]' might come close. I've googled for 'קידה' (images), and it almost only comes up together with 'שעירה', and all pictures are then of the thorny broom in full bloom. Sorry, I wish I could be of more help every now or then. Arminden (talk) 01:00, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry for the bother, pal. 'Trust'? Was that ever in doubt? I know I must come across as intensely annoying at times, but I know an encyclopedic mind when I see one, and in particular one who works overtime to shovel through the overburden of chat to grapple with core facts which is what we're supposed to do here. Anybody passionate about Wikipedia needs tough corrective competition from co-editors whose record of hard work proves their high seriousness and their subsidiary function of jolting one out of either complacency or ignorance. Well, this one is undetermined then. Somewhere along the way, an answer will crop up. Patience. Stay well in these crazy times. Best Nishidani (talk) 06:56, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Palestinology

Arminden, shalom. I see that you have reverted the Category:Palestinologists from the article Gustaf Dalman. I do not know why you insist on deleting this category from his page, since I can think of no other person who best suits the description of a "Palestinologist." Gustaf Dalman worked many long years in Palestine, and served as the chief editor of the academic journal Palästina-Jahrbuch. He has also written extensively about Palestine in other prominent works, besides having authored a seven-volume book entitled "Work and Customs in Palestine," which you are able to Google for more details. He also wrote on the historical, geographical, cultural and agricultural aspects of the country Palestine. Are you saying that geographical reasearch on Palestine does not belong here? For your information, this is how "Palestinologist" is defined in Wiki (see here). Also on the Category:Palestinologists itself, we find the term defined, as you can see here. Therefore, I am at a loss as to your insistence to continually remove the category. Am I missing something? If you'd like, you can put up a RfC (Request for Comment) to get the broader feedback from the community. As it is, I will restore the current category, unless you can show me otherwise that it does not belong in that particular article.Davidbena (talk) 13:50, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@David:, hi. Did you read anything I have written here? Arminden (talk) 22:22, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Arminden, I have not read anything here about the subject, but I have read your notes on the Ubeidiya, West Bank Talk-Page and have addressed your statements there.Davidbena (talk) 22:25, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I mean there, sorry. Because a Geman expression comes to mind, aneinander vorbeireden, more or less "talking past each other", a bit like after the confusion of languages at Babel. Sorry my friend, but that's how I'm feeling. Looking forward to working with you again, Arminden (talk) 00:22, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

principle/pal

Hi Arminden. I am not allowed to edit page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinians, but there is a rather silly typo that needs correcting: in chapter DNA and genetic studies, third paragraph, "According to a study published in June 2017 by Ranajit Das, Paul Wexler, Mehdi Pirooznia, and Eran Elhaik in Frontiers in Genetics, "in a principle component analysis (PCA)..." should be corrected to principal... Can you correct this or otherwise explain to me how to do it / whom to contact? Regards. PaoloDM (talk) 16:21, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Done. Also payback for keida labours on my behalf.:)Nishidani (talk) 16:57, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

@Nishidani: Mille grazie! Now I can start singing "Now that I'm a rich man". Arminden (talk) 23:51, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

No absolutely not. I, as the swindler in the exchange, will take you to arbitration if you steal my right to that lyric. Time is money. My edit took 2 seconds, your search re that spiny plant perhaps a half an hour. Customers disgruntled by my extortions can, I guess sing this in protest while looking west, preferably at sundown when the noise of folks batting the breeze in my Italian pub will guarantee I can't hear it and suffer remorse. Thanks.Nishidani (talk) 07:32, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Your right to that lyric?! Convergence, or subliminal memory cheating me into believing I made it up...? Anyway, buon appetito! Or is it saluti, considering that blood is liquid when fresh? Arminden (talk) 19:31, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Mesha

Hi - you wrote most of the unsourced material (or rather material using only primary sources} here. I was thinking of removing it until I used "Who wrote this" and saw it was you. Any chance you could fix it? Thanks. Doug Weller talk 12:58, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: hi. Thanks for writing me about it. I have slightly more time now than I had back then, so yes, sure, I'll go back to it.

Btw, I didn't know there's a "Who wrote this" function. I'm looking through the edit history when needed, and it takes ages, so I'd be very grateful to you if you could sent me a short "how to do it". Thanks again, Arminden (talk) 14:37, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Oops, it's "Who wrote that" and it's a browser extension for Chrome or Firefox, puts a link on the left-hand side of an article page. mediawikiwiki:Who Wrote That?. It's very useful. Doug Weller talk 15:00, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Sure it's useful! Thanks a lot, you're saving me a lot of time. Arminden (talk) 16:45, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Merge Request

Hi, Arminden. There is currently a discussion on whether or nor King's Garden (Jerusalem) should be merged with Silwan. Can you please interject your opinion there?--Davidbena (talk) 17:51, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dorcas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Judah.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Not appropriate

The above doesn't contribute anything to the discussion @In ictu oculi: hi. Sorry, but did you read anything on this page? Or is "Why are we even having this RM?" your only argument? Because "in a Greek book" can only be a joke. Was it Asterix at the Olympic Games in Greek? Joke aside: did you look up any other Greek book, say, the Septuagint? Or any Greek Orthodox source? I guess not. Start the easy way: look up this article, "Dorcas" for now, at Greek Wiki. You end up here: Αγία Ταβιθά. Αγία Ταβιθά is Saint Tabitha. No Dorkas (with a k in Greek) anywhere in sight in the title, not even in brackets. Dorkas only comes up after the Aramaic, טביתא. Or, as easy: go to orthodoxwiki.org. Search for "Dorcas". Nothing. Surprised? Then "Tabitha". 3 hits! Vestments and Church Supplies with a Tabitha of Joppa Vestments, Russian Ecclesiastical Mission in Jerusalem with "the tomb of St. Tabitha" (in a monastery in Jaffa), and Baptismal names for Orthodox Christians, with - no, no Dorcas/Dorkas, just "Tabitha (f) - St. Tabitha (October 25 - Saint)". Me, as a good Romanian, went to look up www.crestinortodox.ro too. 3 articles mentioning "Tabita" ('Tabita din Iope' in full), and none for Dorcas. You said Greek, not Greek Orthodox in other languages, sorry. So let's Google around for Orthodox sites in Greek: "Ταβιθά" "Ιόππη", and "Ταβιθα" "Ιόππη" (the accent on the α seems to be optional). Ταβιθά or Ταβιθα is the name of the saint everywhere on websites with understandable names like orthodoxoiorizontes.gr ("Agia Tabitha"), orthodoxia.info ("I Tabitha..."), orthodoxianewsagency.gr ("i Agia Tavitha"), or even iellada.gr ("Agia Tavitha"). Try "Δορκάς" "Ιόππη". You get lots of Tabitha, with Dorkas as an explanation following behind it. Why add Joppa? Because I don't want to get hits on gazelles. I guess in Greek there is indeed no need even starting the slightest discussion. But this is English Wiki, and you haven't said a word about the use in English. Arminden (talk) 02:06, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Please don't assume that other editors are imbeciles. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:32, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

I don't assume anything. I don't know anything about you beyond what you wrote, and I answered directly to that. Arminden (talk) 07:32, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Google books

The algorithm that Google Books uses to decide what pages to show is a mystery and it is not deterministic. What one person can see, another cannot. What you can't see today, tomorrow perhaps you can. I suspect (without proof) that it knows how much of a book you looked at in the past and uses that to decide how much to show you now. All of this means that there is no point in mentioning the visibility of a page in a citation. Zero^talk 04:38, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Zero0000 hi. Thanks. I get the impression that it is quite constant and that it is the same everywhere, judging by what people do quote or not. If there's "no preview" or "snippet preview", this must be the decision of the (c) holder and is world-wide. Where you can tweak it, is either to scroll down through the book (you often get pages refused by the search system), or change the country ending in the URL: they programme in differences. I get to see certain pages under either .de, .co.uk, .fr, whatever, which are off limits under most of the other. I have my files with copied material, and if I got stuck on p. 316 in 2014 and again now, I conclude that 317 is simply off limits permanently. But yes, I also notice changes, but I guess that's either because I figured out a new trick (if +), or because some (c) holders have fully withdrawn their permission (if -). Or so I think. Arminden (talk) 09:32, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Arminden; I have often seen that people in other contries cannot see what I can see, and vice versa. Also, you can get a very different view by changing from eg. google.co/ to google.com, etc. So I agree, mentioning which page is visible (for editor Y, in country X), is really pointless, Huldra (talk) 20:40, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Huldra, Zero0000, thanks to you both. I meant to exchange information; I have no way of knowing for sure. Changing the country ending (.co.il, .de, etc.) definitely often changes the pages one can access, but who knows how many variables they programmed into their algorithms.

Do you think it goes that far as varying on the basic level of access? G.B. marks each title or edition with "limited preview", "snippet view" or "no preview". I guess that's the same everywhere, dictated by the (c) holder. Arminden (talk) 21:00, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Often the same book has many different versions uploaded, with different access(!) Look at my User:Huldra/Sources-page, where I (tried!) to collect the different Sharon CIAP-books. Typically one or two has only snippet, while one has preview. It is rather boring (but needed) work to find all the variants, and choose the best, Huldra (talk) 21:09, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

I think to remember that there was a GB change of access policy after publishers sued them, and the access rate dropped at once. Do you remember that too? Arminden (talk) 21:05, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I have no idea, Huldra (talk) 21:09, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

In the Good Old Days^® Google's algorithm for page views varied much more between national versions, and from day to day seemingly at random. Some enterprising soul created a web site where you could order books. The site visited all the Google Books sites several times a day checking for what was available and gradually compiling the complete book page by page. Usually it took 1-2 weeks for it to collect everything but a handful of pages. Unsurprisingly, Google had it shut down and soon changed its algorithm to make such harvesting impractical. The current algorithm is presumably a trade secret. Zero^talk 00:48, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Wow, that is the answer to the "did it change" question! Thanks Zero0000. Now what the "new" algorithm actually does, whether my presumptions are correct or wrong - that's either known to people who've done a thorough study over X countries, or it's not, and I won't make it my life's mission to start one. Mainly: do I see, when I use for instance the ending .it, exactly what anyone searching from Italy would? And does the fact that, over time, I'm repeatedly getting some specific pages and some I never do, mean that that's the case always and everywhere? Rhetorical questions, because I won't start looking for forums discussing it (20 participants from 20 countries, or even 10 well chosen ones, staying on the target for 2-3 years, would deliver the answer; and Google would listen in and change the algorithm if it wished to). But I'll still have my thoughts and draw conclusions from what I notice. Arminden (talk) 08:59, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

When I see a page that is important, I take a screenshot as I can't be sure I'll be able to see it again. This has happened to me many times. Zero^talk 13:39, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Z. Guess what: I've been saving dozens of such screenshots for years now :)) I'm now using Print to separate the actual text from the useless bits around it. There's a way to scan the text and make it fully accessible, but it would be too much trouble for me even if the text didn't get badly scrambled. Arminden (talk) 14:21, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:St Michael Church Cluj with demolished Baroque tower C18.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:St Michael Church Cluj with demolished Baroque tower C18.jpeg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:File copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 15:00, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Unspecified source/license for File:St Michael Church Cluj Baroque outer gate 19thC.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:St Michael Church Cluj Baroque outer gate 19thC.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:File copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 15:45, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Crusader Landscapes

I did finally get a copy of Crusader Landscapes, papers dedicated to Denys Pringle, and it is well worth the $85. Very much related to some of the stuff I'm working on now and, of course, Crusader castles. And erenow.net is now working on my computer! No more going to the library to look up a web address (I have the encyclopedia in pdf).Dr. Grampinator (talk) 19:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Dr. Grampinator, hi. Great for you! Now if I'm stuck with no online source to quote, I'll know whom to ask for help ;) Cheers, Arminden (talk) 10:18, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Amman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Karak.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

1rr

You have violated the 1rr at Caesarea Philippi, please self revert. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 05:39, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Um, actually Arminden can't revert it, because I eliminated the disputed cat. So we can drop the fussing. Arminden, your knowledge of the ground is always a lesson to other editors, no one disputes that. But as Nableezy says, there are rules here and your impatience with finicky procedures mirrors mine by the way, and can get you into needless trouble. I generally ignore them, which is easy because I don't inform myself about them. But if alerted I revert if at fault. I reverted not only because Nableezy is a technician in these tedious but implacably necessary guidelines, and when he makes a call, everyone needs to stop and take note. Not flawless, but authoritatively canny. But this one was also, as far as I can grasp the conversation on that page, straightforward. We should never classify, whatever that country decides in its own narrative world, 'national parks of Israel' areas that are under occupation and therefore in international law not part of Israel. To do so is to assert discursive sovereignty and preempt the lay of the law. That is standard on wiki. Just make a mental note to tell me to get fucked on reading this, by all means, but be more careful in the future. Not all disputes here are matters of POV activists preaching a cause. Nishidani (talk) 09:22, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

The template is still in the article, so he can self revert that at least. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 10:00, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Nishidani, hi. I had actually logged out, I don't know how come that I still got emailed. Thank you so much as always for your friendship and care, but I will really try to stay away for as long as I can. I was only thinking to contact you again about your email, so we don't need to be disconnected once I'm off. I can't stand the mix between lack of grasp & logic and unrelenting insistence. And formal correctness coupled with lack of substance. I truly can't, it's not some affectation. The matter has no merit whatsoever, but it is beyond silly. You didn't get the gist of it in your cursory look at the page. I easily get what you wrote. The crack is twofold, both regarding comprehension.

Matter No. 1 is the difference between two topics: A), lack of sources (solved); B), a clear case of "moving the goal posts", leading to a matter of elementary school set theory: that if set A is included in set B, a smaller subset C of A is also included in set B. Nableezy insisted in allowing the wider Hermon/Banias National Park to be tagged as an Israeli national park (so that's where your analysis doesn't work), even had no qualms about Caesarea Philippi (CP) having a link to the official website of that park under External links (!), but he (and only him) fought teeth & claws against adding the category Israeli national park to Caesarea Philippi on formal grounds, so nothing to do with occupation.

Matter No. 2 is a separate facet of that: CP is not a site, it's a period; the site is Banias, which was at different times called Paneas, CP, Neronias, Banias; so he insisted on separating a TEMPORARY subset from a compact, relatively small SPACIAL site. He was fine with the SITE being connected to the incriminated category, but not the temporal subset: either the one, or the other, both can't have the category, as he put it. That I can't even qualify in logical terms. CP is history + a heap of ruins, reworked into & intertwined with older and younger ones, all over a smallish area, all in the same national park, which is a form of administration, under (genocidal apartheid murderous criminal satanical baleful sideral) occupation (never my point of contention, and allegedly his either), acknowledged and not rejected by him. All you can - logically - attempt to do, is to take the immaterial part - history - out of the national park connection, since the material part - ruins - you can't; but that is never done. Once some ruins have a known history, that history becomes part the site; and the site is uncontestedly part of a national park. Unlike, say, biblical toponyms where there is no corresponding identified tell, at least not a consensual one: there you have an immaterial part and no material one, so you have to separate the name from non-consensual sites/tells. Here you are, me being also my own devil's advocate. But I hate playing both sides in a dispute, I never much liked playing chess against myself.

You have the inverse problem with Emmaus and Bethsaida for instance, where there is more than one strong candidate, and they are all dealt with on the same page, with separate articles branching off for the individual sites; logical and clean. Or you have a similar situation at Capernaum, where a wider Kfar Nahum (Capernaum) National Park exists, leading to both a link and the category being added, although and in spite of the fact that it's the Franciscans who actually run the site and the N.P. authority has no say there. Or the Yosemite N.P., a case brought up by Nableezy but misunderstood by him, where each feature that has a Wiki article of its own is part of a sub-category of Yosemite N.P., which is itself part of the categ. US Nat'l Parks (Wiki sees that as "staying under the umbrella" of the wider category). Russian dolls, nice & clean. Logic meeting practice. But I guess the Ahwahnechee are less activistic on Wiki and don't fight logic & reality on this platform.

All that, taken together, is beyond cursory missing a logical point, which can happen, that is proof of either limited comprehension of basic matters of logic, or activism that goes beyond one's own better sense. Either way, it's infuriating to any thinking person. In itself not worth more than a smile, but in conjunction with the amounts of time I'm wasting on Wiki and the growing backlog of unsolved real life matters, it's the straw that broke the camel's back. So thanks again for your friendship and excellent intentions, but I'll try to go where Amy Winehouse famously refused to go. Lots of warm greetings and I hope, if going cold turkey works, that I'll be more available for keeping up my promises and correspondence, which I shamefully haven't. Cheers mate, Arminden (talk) 11:27, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

It was not misunderstood by me jfc, again maybe pretend we arent dumber than you? I said to make a Category:Banias and include that in the national parks category and include this article in that category. That you did not understand that does not mean that I did not. Seriously, the level of pomposity is unreal here. You still dont get the basic issue here. But Im the one that is a moron. nableezy - 14:55, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

There I did it for you. Maybe stop acting like you the only one that understands anything here now? You not understanding how categorization works here and insisting that the article follow you in your refusal to actually follow our policies because you alone have an understanding of the higher purpose of Wikipedia and your edits are not to be challenged since they are manifestly in keeping with that higher purpose is as ever charming but not something I particularly care for. If youre going to leave, as you threatened to do before once again edit-warring to include things that very obviously do not belong in an article, then I wish you good fortune. I personally doubt it, but guess we'll find out together. nableezy - 15:00, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

You are a descriptivist of the realist school. I by native bent (first attempt at a book aged 13 a complete history of the constituent elements of the universe, i.e. a history of the elements in the Mendeleev table; followed by an attempt to make a genealogy of the Greek gods down to their heroic offspring) start from the start, not in medias res. You and Nableezy can argue till the cows come home re wiki cats, and it is not in either case, ideological ('genocidal apartheid murderous criminal satanical baleful sideral.') It is about how to apply cats, based on wiki policy re cats or the internal comparison of cats as they have been attached to numerous articles. You share a common premise in this context.

Wiki is very much a random process of composition, in the sense that whoever visits, edits, tags does so off their own bat, according to their own lights and decades on we have some very rough coherence per guidelines but in practice, enormous variation and internal inconsistencies. You both are arguing within that framework amid the flotsam and jetsam piled up by passing editors, some contested some not, but with no internal crosspage cogency. I go back to first principles, which of course relate to a logic prior to wiki practice or policy.

• It is indisputably true that accumulated practice by Israel has led to its declaring large areas outside its frontiers but within the territory it controls 'national parks'
• This creates a semantic anomaly. 'National' means 'of or belonging to a nation(-state)'. Israel can go about renaming the occupied/unilaterally annexed territories as it likes, and ipso fact classify these as parts of Israel. But they aren't. It is one of your 'facts' that Israel has done this. It is one of the 'facts' that these locations are not in Israel, and therefore not 'national' in any other sense that a declarative rhetorical assertiveness that possession means ownership. A cat used or abused to imply that these areas are in Israel is deceptive. The only way to fix this would be to make a separate cat for 'Israeli parks outside Israel' or something like that. Nishidani (talk) 14:34, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes, "Category:Israeli proclaimed national parks in occupied territories" should be created. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 15:10, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

By the way, I am perplexed about ' I was only thinking to contact you again about your email.' Correct me if I am wrong. I can't ever recall sending you an email, so if there is one under my nickname be careful. Perhaps I am forgetful. But I do recall once you suggesting we might converse under that format, and deciding that it would be improper for me to initiate a conversation via that venue (intrusive). Best Nishidani (talk) 14:34, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

That article isnt covered by the 1RR. nableezy - 14:52, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes it is, all A-I content is. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 15:11, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Whether or not it is a national park is not A-I content. That isnt what Arminden and I have been arguing about. nableezy - 15:16, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Since this is disputed (Ai can cover specific I/P sections not all of the article), not grasping that 1R applied is understandable, SD. I think I removed the contested cat, and told Arminden that he need not revert. So if there is some residual problem, it's mine, not his. Nishidani (talk) 15:21, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

And one last thing, SD. This niggling over that 1R issue is trivial. Arminden is a very good editor. He and I are at opposite ends of the POV spectrum. This area desperately needs knowledgeable goodfaith Israeli editors. Most won't touch it with a 10 foot pole because of the toxic history, much of which, something Arminden doesn't quite appear to grasp, caused by the natural wariness of many editors whose approach he might find unacceptable at having to face down, and waste years of their wikiworking lives, over 550 socks, 99% with an intemperate and uninformed 'pro-Israeli' POV. This place needs people like Arminden, tough-minded, highly knowledgeable, and genuinely concerned about the way an encyclopedia represents his country. The more like that we have, the less tedium from socks (which reminds me, I must run a dozen pairs through the laundry. People are starting to sniff when I share a drink with them at my local bar). We all need a break from this place at times, and life is more important than Wikipedia. Being pissed off here can be in fact a net positive if it yields us all more time to address RL issues, without prejudice to some future leisure spent re-editing.Nishidani (talk) 15:35, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@Nishidani: hi. I truly need to stay away from Wikipedia. Regarding email: it's not the first time I'm trying a detox, and I did once ask you if keeping in contact outside Wiki would be an option, back then mainly because I didn't think this to be the right place for elaborating on more personal views on topics that came up here — appropriate is another word, in terms of relevance, privacy, ecology even. You answered, as far as I can remember, that it were an option, but that staying here can be of use to others as they can read through our conversation. This, in conjunction with an invitation to visit you sent out to an old Wiki friend of yours that seemed to address me too, as it was in the plural, I took to be an open door to moving our contact on to a RL level. Sorry for misunderstanding it, I know privacy and keeping a distance are important. Arminden (talk) 10:07, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Nah. I meant that I didn't want to be intrusive. No problem at all in emailing me. Rest assured. I'm sorry you find this place distressing, and heartily recommend a break. I've even said that to others ('on my side', ha!) Life has bigger priorities. If your serenity gains while Wikipedia loses out, then fuck wikipedia. Foist fings foist. Anyway, pal, no worries. Drop me a note/email whenever you feel like batting the breeze with this cantankerous geezer. I solemnly promise not to divagate in detail on the niceties of spin bowling, or memories of Derek Randall's magnificent innings or Dennis Lillee's lbw dismissal of Alan Knott to win the Centenary Test in March 1977, (unless of course requested!) Strictly private. Best regards Nishidani (talk) 10:48, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Copyright

Do not deliberately post links to copyright violating material as you did on Cave de Sueth's talk page. You are aware that it is copyright violating, yet you still added them to the talk page. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. If you continue to post such links, you may be blocked from editing. Canterbury Tail talk 15:41, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

@Canterbury Tail: Please read my reply on that talk-page, drink a glass of cold water, and rethink your style. And then go ahead and do whatever you feel like, horse heads under the blanket and all. Arminden (talk) 16:21, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:29, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Ways to improve Architecture of Israel (magazine)

Hello, Arminden,

Thank you for creating Architecture of Israel (magazine).

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Fails WP:NJOURNAL, requires significant coverage in multiple independent secondary sources. The Architecture of Israel website is a primary source and therefore not independent.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Dan arndt}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Dan arndt (talk) 11:08, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Dan arndt hi. I don't care much about the magazine. It was an annoying ballast on the main page, especially due to an/some persistent editor/s who kept on pushing it. Maybe they will care more and do dome work on it. Cheers,

Disambiguation link notification for December 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Aqaba Fortress, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ottoman.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Akane Yamaguchi

Hello. Help copy edit and summarizes the article. Thanks you. Edmyoa (talk) 09:22, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

​Edmyoa, sorry, but badminton is none of my interests. Don't know what brought you to me in the first place. Arminden (talk) 09:29, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

See wot trubble mucken about with Japanologists like meself online can getcha inta, pal? Identity confewshen, or is that contextually Confucius? I'll look into it.Nishidani (talk) 10:20, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

​Take cover, Aussie on board! Good to see you around, less great that I am still escaping the real world in this realm of the restless shadows. Zero brought me up to date with Early Roman Nazareth yesterday, so there is some actual gain in sticking around, but this badminton attack is a good reminder of how one can slide into the abyss. Bring light onto the peoples, Nishida-san! Arminden (talk) 10:31, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

'Realm of the restless shadows'? That sounds uneasily on my ear with its chthonian undertone, reinforced by placing a pomegranate by my wife's grave yesterday and reading up on Eumillipes persephone today. Whatever it is, pal, you're also Roumanian, and this morning I watched interviews with Transylvanian mountain folk coping effortlessly without a Covid vaccine - tough cookies. So burrow and barge through the bullshit, whatever it is, with stoic fortitude. There's little light these wintry times, but thinking in tunnel terms can conjure up a prospect of it. My thoughts are with you. Best Nishidani (talk) 10:48, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

​The most Romanian of all attitudes, the way I understand it, is to make "haz de necaz", fun at trouble. I thought I'm practicing it, with a cynical touch, true, or at least that was the intention. I believe I'm not the only one who ends up at Wiki in an exercise of evasion and procrastination (damn, how did I end up using the P word, which I truly hate for sounding so pretentious, like most Latinisms embraced in the US, swallowed whole and undigested?). Lovely gesture, the pomegranate. Full of red juicy seeds. The more I learn about your private life, the more I believe you've made a lot of right choices.

Yes, I was about to look up that true millipede too, but you've now presented me with the link, thanks! The Huntsman spider is next - we're all getting the same news nowadays.

I wouldn't fully follow the example of the Transylvanian mountain folk. Lovely people, full of urig life juices, but they put most of their trust in God, whose support they apply for by kissing icons and greenish bones of medieval corpses in mass processions, Covid be damned, as well as in ţuică, pălincă or horincă (the difference is minimal, just the alcohol percentage is rising between them from "madness" to "deadly"). You might find the latter fun, but I'm more on the dry side of humanity - I hope not in character, just in terms of processed plums.

I've noticed that my coping strategy is usually by escaping to where my mind is taking me, not by conscious decision, but by inclination, which can work quite well for a while, but is counterproductive in coping with RL. So many thanks, I'm not feeling depressed or stuck on the wrong side of the Styx, just too firmly banished on an island and losing too much control over whatever can be controlled. I know too well the John Lennon quote about life happening while one imagines he's setting it up according to his plan, but not all is out of our hand.

May you make the best of Christmas time and may our thoughts meet time and again, which is pretty much guaranteed! Arminden (talk) 13:03, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm remiss, with your Christmas wishes (thanks), in not being able to augur you a fine Hanukkah celebration, already well passed. I tend to think in a pagan seasonal cycle, with Christmas meaningless therefore, though I can recall singing 'Stille Nacht! Heilige Nacht!,' Christmas 1975 when a choir of Japanese turned up wanting the share the occasion with foreigners, and struck up the English version. Singing the German original in a corner was one way of detaching myself from the religious resonance while being sociable with kindly strangers. I only remember that because the Japanese music teacher came up and thanked me, saying I had a wonderful voice (either too much pre-convivial champagne, or she had some aspirations for kicking on that evening). With the millennium switchover moment, and the world globally organized to celebrate the dawning 21st century, I excused myself with my wife, jumped a plane downunderwards, where my brother's house was empty as they were vacationing, and, that night, listened to classical music whle cooking an early feed, read a novel, and hit the fartsack by 10.30 p.m, unusually for me, missing that, thanks to the tetragrammaton, all of the wired-in global network of midnight euphoria. I'll remember this Christmas though. It will be the first passed without my inscribed wedding ring, which I lost somewhere in the street an hour ago.

Friends some months ago were joshing about wanting to buy my soul: it was a standard piece of bar banter. No amount of improvised metaphysics (that its posited existence was one more case of Ryle's Ghost in the machine) or economic arguments (how could I sell, or someone purchase, a non-existent object? So one night I turned up with a fully drawn up notarial document, selling it for 2 caesars to be purchased in bitcoin on my decease. That seemed the only way to get rid of a stale argument whose comic potentials had been exhausted and were running to cliché. I read it out and they signed with triumphant alacrity (not reading it meant they missed the finer print which mocks the transaction) One instruction was to put one of the caesars in my mouth to pay Charon's ferry fee at the Styx; the other was to be inserted in my rectum, just in case I got bored in the hypothetical beyond and needed to buy my way back). Yes, we'll certainly stay in touch. Best regards Nishidani (talk) 13:39, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the Hanukkah wishes, which are about as much fitting my lifestyle as mine were yours. Nobody ever bothered to educate me in this direction, so Communist Christmas with Father Snow was what I cared for as a kid. The "winter tree" and eventually the Xmas tree with candles and glass globes was always there, and Romanian Orthodox and later German Lutheran Xmas carols all around me added to the very real charm of the light festival - with the bonus of the embarrassment caused by the lyrics. A Bach Christmas concert in the "Schwarze Kirche" of Kronstadt/Brașov was one of the most emotional goodbyes and memories I was able to take from my country and first stage of my life. Snow, fire and music are a nice mix, especially at the foot of the Carpathians or Alps, and it takes a lot of kitsch, and religious & commercial pressure to fully spoil it. Or loneliness. And that's why I'm truly sorry for the ring you've lost. "Don't hang on to objects", fine, but I'm just noticing how much I can even miss certain people's profile photos on Whatsapp, which are on a very different level than wedding rings. May the season feel like a million shiny caesars! (I'm not going into where they should be placed, nor how 500,000 undecided crossings of the Styx might influence the mood of even the merriest boatman; the image should suffice.) Arminden (talk) 15:00, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

​I guess I'm landing at Wiki's shores time and again like others end up endlessly solving crossword puzzles: to get the feeling that I'm using my brain in the way I've been taught and I've taught myself as being use- and meaningful. What a blunder. I don't suppose that you'd want to waste your time looking at it, but I've found myself copy-editing our friend Davidbena's article "Primitive clay oven". He is excellent in drawing from Jewish sources, but once he tries to create around that an article on a truly universal topic, I'm having very serious doubts about the result. I see it as a typical case of an expert going beyond his level of expertise. There is a term and a whole theory about that, how hierarchical structures tend to raise very able people above their level of expertise and damage both the system and the person, but once more I can't remember the term. The brain is a very strange muscle indeed, in a thousand different ways. Arminden (talk) 16:28, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes. David is a solid and knowledgeable editor. If only he could widen a tad his horizons to look more comprehensively at topics. Mind you, we benefit in any case from his learning even if it is so restricted to just Jewish themes, as if there was some ontological disconnect between hundreds of Jewish cultures and their neighbouring cultures. Once scouting for beer during Ramadan on the outskirts of Bethlehem (a Roumanian priest pressed me daily to find him a couple of bottles), I came across a place that had a discreet Heineken sign barely visible from the road. On knocking, we were given royal treatment. The head of the family regaled me with tales of his diasporic life as a teacher of classical Arabic, and furnished us with numerous delicacies from his back garden, trellised over with huge bunches of ripe grape. He told me that if I ever passed through, to give him prior notice next time round because he would love to cook lamb for my wife and I in his underground oven. So I don't know why David writes only in the past tense in the section on Palestinian Tabun, or restricts such ovens to breadmaking. I've only speed-read this stuff, since I've been boozing (not my fault: I was telephoned to do so with amicable urgency this afternoon) and must get some shut-eye. I've bookmarked the pages. Nishidani (talk) 22:21, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Furnace

Several editors have fixed most of the links broken by the recent move of Furnace, but another 169 articles still need to be repaired. Please can you help? Thanks, Certes (talk) 17:58, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Jerusalem video

Moved to the talk-page of the article, so others can read and contribute. Arminden (talk) 20:57, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Hey

it's as weird as the incongruous Hungarian accent of the off-voice speaking the Latin text

Steady on, Jeezus anno domini abracadabra Kerrist! I mean, apart from a Latin-fluent Hungarian friend, despite his Stalinism, who tried to smash my head in with a full beer can when I reminded him, during a bout of serious early morning drinking, of Lenin's last words about his Georgian hero, and adding salt to the wound by suggesting Trotsky would have been a better leader! (He later apologized, after a bite of the dog that bit him the morning after, by giving me the bullet he was shot with in 1956), it's quite appropriate to have an Hungarian accent with Latin, certainly as legitimate as the Italian accent used in the Vatican. The Hungarians, unless I am mistaken, were the last European people to use it when discussing issues of high moment, in places like their parliament. Nishidani (talk) 23:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Mind you with the bullet there remains some ambiguity, since it was folded in an envelope with a quotation in Russian: a hand for a friend, a bullet for an enemy. Nishidani (talk) 23:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

​How do you mark a grin when no emoji is available? OK, King András II even lead a Crusade, with less than moderate results, but they say that Hungary's glory grows with each defeat, so there you go. I bet they did, use Latin as the last ones, as long as it wasn't German or Turkish it served them just perfectly.

You're lucky. Dyed-in-the-wool Huns use their bicska and not a silly beer mug, that's such a Teutonic thing to do! And a bicska tends to be rather sharp. So, how many Magyar feelings did I manage to hurt already? Anyway, a video mixing at least 3 different centuries, on the topic of Frankish Jerusalem, voiced-over by a proud Ferencz or Imre in the language of the Pope, produced by the German ZDF and posted by a colleague with a Gaelic name on English Wikipedia, that beats even the cast of Meeting Venus, that masterpiece by Szabó István. Put it on music and we can take it to Broadway, make a buck and live happily ever after. Or forever run from vengeful Hussars around the world like the poor guy in The Duellists. Old movies... Glory days... Jézus, Mária és József! Arminden (talk) 23:43, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

​Stalinist... 1956... Who was he shooting at, this friend of yours? Arminden (talk) 10:26, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Well, drinking buddies five decades ago. I did meet up with him again at a conference and hailed him by citing his Russian adage (Рука другу, пуля врагу) across a room many years later, after 1989, and, embarrassed, he hurried away, wanting to bury his past. So be it. He supported the bad guys, the invading Russians, and was shot by some upriser. Even earlier he became wary of me when, one morning I came over to his digs for a whiskey to start the day, knocking as I heard him typing away. Generous to a fault, he interrupted his work and we drank a few snifters. I couldn't help but glance at his typewriter,- a letter in Hungarian - and note a figure 46,000 (from memory) in it. So, being mischievous, I quipped: 'Hmmm! reporting to your handlers in the KGB back home the number of Nato tanks in Europe:)?' He blanched and, flustered, rushed to cover the incriminating letter. I had to soothe his sudden suspicion (recurrent in my life even in Italy) that I was a spy (if one has a fairly strong memory for military and spy history, and your casual interlocutor happens to be 'in the trade', this wrong inference is inevitable. A hearty Russian, shouting drinks all round in a Tokyo pub - and praised by all the regulars as a great boon companion, once looked shocked when, addressing me, I replied in Russian, as if I had blown his cover, and took to his heels and never turned up there again, etc.etc.etc), I tried, that is, - to finish this sentence as memories crowd back in- to ease his qualms by saying that info was already known in the Eastern bloc, since it had been widely reported in the Western press. He wrote Latin fluently, together with 10 other languages. Ideological blinkers in early youth. What a waste.Nishidani (talk) 14:05, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

And me, I had naively thought that dealing with informers from one's youth, people who have written reports on what you ate or said, is as far as non-00s can get... Arminden (talk) 14:33, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

What a waste indeed. Him, and those he put 6 feet under, indirectly if not directly. Maybe he survived that murderous bunch of Arrow Cross beasts and stayed loyal to the Soviets who saved him for a touch too long. I've heard it from my grandparents too: literally everybody closed their deals with the fascists, all except for the Communists; some remembered only that, others managed to think a step further. In retrospect, from the perspective of wasted potential, they all look like on(e?) camp. It reminds me of that Jewish joke: Shmuel has been eagerly waiting for his father to die so that he can finally read the venerable man's private religious comments. The minute he can, he picks up his father's Talmud and reads the first hand-written note he comes across. Next to the line "To work on Shabbat is as grave a sin as sleeping with your neighbour's wife", the note read: "I've tried both - but gosh, WHAT a difference!" Arminden (talk) 14:52, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Brilliant! (The chap was a mere child when the Arrow Cross called the shots. I don't think they look like one camp (a dangerous argument because that's precisely what Ernst Nolte argued, with the scarcely ambiguous innuendo of using the gulag evidence to revisit, and if not whitewash, attenuate the history of Nazism. In many specific realities it may have looked that way to many (Frank Knopfelmacher lost I think 19 family members to Nazism, and, after a sojourn in Palestine, returned to join the Communist party in Czechoslovakia unill he realized that form of totalitarianism was singling out dissenters in a not dissimilar form, though not on an ethnic basis, and, fortunately, to Australia's advantage, emigrated downunder. Many other Jews came out of WW2 leftists because their experience spoke a different message. Reading Vasily Grossman, among others, and the profound, moving love he had for his native Russia and his fellow citizens, even in the midst of the usual anti-Semitic quips, makes me very wary of attempts to roll right and left into a omnium gatherum swag and conflate them. Distinctions, even among types of evil, can and often have, made the difference between life and death. Nishidani (talk) 15:36, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Regarding RFD nomination of Shunet Nimrin

Wanted to give you a heads up that I moved your nomination of Shunet Nimrin to the next day's page (2022 January 20). When nominating a redirect on WP:RFD, please follow the instructions listed at WP:RFD#HOWTO. When you posted the nomination, you did not perform any of the steps listed at the aforementioned page, specifically: tagging the redirect (step 1), listing the redirect properly on the RFD page with the {{Rfd2}} template (step 2), or notify the redirect's creator (step 3). Steel1943 (talk) 03:35, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi ​ Steel. Thanks for taking care of the request. Look, I'm focused on content, studying history and geography is more than filling my spare (?!) time. I'm trying to learn what I absolutely need to know about WP instruments, but up to a level. Removing a redirect is disproportionately complicated beyond belief. Renaming ("moving") an article is normally a one-click matter, while removing a redirect can be on the level of introducing an amendment to the US Constitution. I'm not into spending a ridiculous amount of time on technical issues. There are other types of redirect removal, which are far less bureaucratic; I tried one of those, and Liz (hi Liz!) removed that request, pointing me to this. She knows better, so thank you Liz. I have put a lot of attention into making the case for why this redirect is wrong and into researching its history (who introduced it, if they're still active, when, in what context), I also dealt with another wrong redirect (Ghoraniyeh) created by the same editor in the same context - so I'm not lazy in matters I consider relevant, and that is: correct content. On the other hand, bureaucratic, technically poorly developed, sluggish and awkward procedures go against the spirit of WP and I'm not inclined to waste time with that. The only raison d'être for WP is to offer correct and concise information; I'm into helping out with that. If WP starts requiring from me to waste time in studying insufficiently developed, unripe sub-programmes, I'll answer with the abdication comment of the last king of Saxony, "Well, then dou your _ _ _ _ by yourselves!"–to the programmers, of course, not to you or Liz, who helped me and have the best intentions, which I appreciate. Since it's on my own talk-page, I just wanted to have it in written. If you have a dog in this fight and know where to approach the programmers, maybe you can give them a ping. I'm sure they can do a better job. It's not a trial with the Supreme Court, it's just about drawing the attention of fellow editors who have the kindness to spend time on judging in these matters, to take a look and decide. Also, why an editor like me, who's made probably thousands of edits in this specific field, can't remove all by himself a completely wrong redirect introduced 10 years ago by an editor who isn't active anymore, is beyond me. A notice on the talk-page should be enough, if the edit summary doesn't suffice. Like with any edit. If it turns out to be controversial, there is a procedure for that. Complicating things is a disservice to everyone. Thanks again, Arminden (talk) 12:45, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

I'd say to just give the tool Twinkle a try as it can do all of the steps I mentioned automatically, making it so that whole process doesn't have to be remembered. Steel1943 (talk) 19:21, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

@Steel1943: thanks, I had no idea it can do that. It certainly sounds like an excellent idea and I'll look into it. Thanks! Arminden (talk) 21:49, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I saved the redirect. Unfortunately I am tired to make a stub, the way I did with "Ghoraniyeh". It takes lots of searching efforts for such minute subjects. Loew Galitz (talk) 04:36, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

I made a stub, Ash-Shunah al-Janubiyah for better redirect. Please vote at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 20. Loew Galitz (talk) 04:05, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Al-Shuna al-Shamalyah

Seriously, Armiden; edits like this, with exactly 0 sources is no good. I don't doubt the veracity of it, but WP:NOR exists for a reason... Cheers, Huldra (talk) 21:59, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Huldra, hi. You should know me by now, one step at a time. Nishidani, thanks for giving a hand. Yes, I was a bit slow, nothing new there, but now it's sorted, with two good sources. Al Ameer son, hi, maybe there's a central discussion page on an "enWiki guide of style for Arabic", at least one for the S Levant or even parts of it (Jordan, I/P)? I could move this material to that page, it could possibly serve a wider purpose. Thanks to all, Arminden (talk) 14:22, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Also nothing new: if a page is created with deep & multiple spelling flaws, like "Al-Shuna Al Shamalyah" (same article once hyphened and once not, the same sound spelled in two different ways, once a and once ah, the inside article capitalised for no good reason, and the long ī spelled in the most "original" way, y), I have zero problems with fixing the mistakes and offering a good, fully unsourced explanation, rather than leaving the article in such a condition that it stands a good chance of winning the Guinness Book entry for the highest density of spelling mistakes in one name. Why you would find fault with the correction rather than with the deeply flawed article name is beyond me. I won't tire to say: the user and the info we're offering are the only raison d'être of this project, not my OCD habit with it or anything else. Wiki is full of OR and unsourced material, but such a collection of spelling flaws is rare. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 14:39, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

I responded on the article talk page. Al Ameer (talk) 04:17, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Loew Galitz, hi!

​ I'm very happy, from an egoistic point of view, that you've joined the work here. Not sure I can be happy for you, but that you must know. It can easily become OC. If you do have a good grip on it, then I'm happy for you too! I see we're sharing quite a few common interests, so I'm sure we'll cross ways more than once. Please excuse my temper, sometimes I sound harsher than I mean to. Have a great time around here! Cheers, Arminden (talk) 22:06, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Indeed, tracking down all these various transliteration requires a good deal of OC (I created only 27 articles, but 235 redirects and about 90 disambig/surname pages). Fortunately, I am a software programmer, and this job requires significant OCness, so I am trained to keep it at bay :-) It particular, I am immune to wikiholism (I believe): I am mercilessly trimming my watchlist and actively using the new feature: temporary watching. Loew Galitz (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Nice to meet you guys. Unfortunately I don't belong to the club of Arabic editors. I know only Hebrew. A major hole in my knowledge, I know. As for 'wikiholism,' I have a pretty heavy watchlist, but I only look actively into some 20% of it at the most. And that percentage can easily go down to 10% or 5%, depending on the level of creativity in real life. Cheers, warshy ^(¥¥) 17:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Don't worry, I'm lame on both legs, Google T. is my crutch. One can only get the bigger picture by looking at least at both sides of the Jordan, and that's only the start, so I'm doing the best I can. The entire region and beyond, all periods, all parties with an input since the beginning, with geology and physical geography as the canvas and mold for everything. But organised I'm not, so we'll meet wherever the day takes me. Beside that, the world is full of interesting people and topics, there's a rumour that the Middle East isn't the centre of the Universe, maybe just the navel and only sometimes. See you soon! Cheers, Arminden (talk) 20:10, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

To be able to look at both sides of the Jordan is a great achievement, a great asset in my view. I wish I could too, but alas, there is only so much one can learn. At least I know who to ask now, on some basic stuff pertaining to Arabic. Enjoy your work over here! The part I enjoy the most is the learning. Cheers, warshy ^(¥¥) 22:24, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

ARIJ

Ok, so why are you removing links to the ARIJ-site? Huldra (talk) 23:25, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

@Huldra: hi. I am not. I seldom remove, I'm into collecting, not throwing out. Pls check the "Bibliography". There were URL repeated up to 4 times - it makes absolutely no sense. I thought there'd been some kind of a programme crash when all my edits disappeared and redid them one by one. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 23:31, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

There is sense in having them more than once; so you can immediately check if info is there. And the ARIJ-links are normally given under EL; (and not in the biblio-section); it is convenient to have them always in the same place, so you know immediately where to check (unless you want to change the position for all the several hundred places/articles?) Huldra (talk) 21:17, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

To editor Huldra: sorry to say, but you made a mess :)

• Referenced sources ("Village profile") don't go under "External links".
• The URL of "Village profile" links to the entire brochure, not to a specific page, so you don't win anything by linking it each time within the text.
• Now you linked the second occurrence, but not the first (if anything, there!) and the third.

Out of respect for your input, I'll follow your wish and leave the "Village profile" link in the text (where it's first cited), but please allow for the other issues to be put in order. If I did have the patience, I would most definitely fix all the others in this manner. One fixed is better then none, the other way 'round would be a sophism, don't you think? Cheers, Arminden (talk) 22:31, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Khirbet ed-Deir

Arminden, shalom. There are actually two, if not three places known as Khirbet ed-Deir. The article that you recently touched upon speaks specifically about the Khirbet ed-Deir to the immediate south of Surif, within about one or two miles. Huldra and I have already discussed the other Khirbet ed-Deir. It is important not to be confused between the two or three sites, all going by the same name.Davidbena (talk) 02:16, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

​ Hi David. Thank you, I am now well aware of that, see the talk-page there. I was sure w/o knowing any figures, just based on the very generic nature of the name, that there must be even more, Zero has found 13 in the SWP lists, and I found out that there's one even on the same sheet (21) of the SWP map, SW of Hebron. If RL doesn't stop me, I intend to finish tomorrow a decent stub on the ruined monastery in Nahal Arugot/Wadi Ghar east of the village. Have a great day, Arminden (talk) 03:08, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Just a Nestorian aftermath to my note on the other page

In my phoneyillogical crack, I was of course ironically alluding to the jüdische Geschwätzigkeit spouted by the usual myrmidon suspects, but, as a collector of books on national stereotypes, a life-long reading in the genre impresses me with the insight that any negative or positive adjective/substantive can be used of virtually any people. To seize on just that word illustratively. The Germans themselves or generally Nordic stock were thought garrulous, for example, as opposed to say the French or the Italians, who were thought garrulous in a different manner. Even my forebears, the Irish were not immune to put-downs of this particular kind. Even the Japanese, who entertain a major self-image as taciturn, struck several Meiji foreigners as garrulous, an impression one might be tempted to endorse if you watch too many of their TV shows (as anywhere, for that matter/mutter/Muttersprache). The point of this Shandyean digression being that prejudice by outsiders works on a very sorry stock of simplifying terms of approval and disapprobation that only tell us something about those who use them. 'Jewish' before any noun, if used by an outsider, naturally alerts one to possible prejudice in the shady wings of conversation, but cognitively, among Jews, the same set of terms is often greeted with a knowing nod (as if it were true, in that context) Nonetheless, one does well to put one's self in another ethnic boots, or on another set of stilts, and see how this works with 'German', 'English','Chinese', 'Russian' (and any other ethnos). The results are surprisingly similar, though none of the others wear the particular burden of having the antennae fine-tuned to the kind of ethnophobic niggling that, in the longue durée, has afflicted prophylactically an awareness of being 'Jewish'. Many studies of anti-Semitism lack this comparativist dimension, producing a sense that, in every instance, being singled out for stereotyping is singular, or unique to Jews. Cheers Nishidani (talk) 14:29, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

​Sorry for being so simplistic in my comments and even overlooking a fine irony-by-reversal. Wikipedia pedantry seems to exacerbate my own, to the serious detriment of my humour perception. Half sad, half funny. Anyway, that masseba/matzevah story is just the latest example of my banal struggle with the English spelling of Hebrew words and place-names: what's "right" nowadays, between the influence of German and Yiddish (tz/z), strictly Yiddish (ei, ey), and lately English (ts), on top of the switch in the context of Biblical Hebrew from b to v (Strong's abib and today's aviv). David does readily have all the answers of a Tanakh scholar who went through a solid modern education, but I don't know him well enough to appreciate how well he can offer the view from outside the fonderia.

In Romania the degree of verbosity is supposedly a direct function of the region you're from. Seen from a German perspective though, all Romanians, with no exception, seem to always shout at each other, so that Germans constantly expect them to exchange blows when they're just having a friendly chat. As they say, "mămăliga nu explodează", polenta doesn't blow up, even if it constantly burbles. Some add to that, "dar şi cînd explodează!", but (hold on well) when it does blow up! In other words, people here shouldn't take my verbal belligerency all too seriously either. Not most of the time. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 15:25, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

When guests from several countries met my Italian relatives over lunch or dinner, they would frequently interrupt the conversation to ask me what the Italians were squabbling or upset about. Many conversations struck them as verging on WW3. They were relieved to find out that the Italian contingent were talking about their children or recipes amicably .:) Nishidani (talk) 16:01, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Q.E.D.! Unless one drops in the cliché of Latins & their ways. Arminden (talk) 16:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

And top that, subversively, by noting all of the perceived differences between, or sterotypes associated with, Lombards,Piedmontese,Venetians, Sardinians, Tuscans, Marchegiani, Neapolitans, Calabrians, Sicilians, Romans, each having distinct dialects, cuisine,etc., Until recent times, you could travel through 4 villages within a radius of 15 miles and listen to 4 dialects that were almost mutually incomprehensible, and each with a resolute sense of being different from the others. In the village where I summer in, their dialect had three versions,- upper, middle, lower -according to hillside location and socio etc.economic function. Now a dozen languages are spoken by immigrants from China, India,Morocco, Nigeria. Nations are a fiction, with some real legal powers, as are the identities attached to them.Nishidani (talk) 17:38, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

​I guess it is, like any extension of oneself - family, clan, tribe, circle of friends... If kept on a rational level, it goes into how important it is to have and preserve the cultural environment one needs in order to feel at ease, which includes certain aspects of nature, one's main language, a way of expressing emotions, the sense of humour, food, artistic expression, memories and so on. Every single thinking person must at some point at least ask oneself how much they'd be willing to sacrifice for obtaining or preserving that kind of comfort, or how well they can live without it. There will always be many more or less concentric layers, humanity not even being the largest one. I don't believe such questions have a single, ultimate answer, like this or that major concept being but a fiction. It has been said about love, family... almost anything; in some cases science can refute or support such a claim, in others less so, in my view. It can work better for some than for others, for some a radical change of environment can mean torment and even life cut short by many years, or loss of meaning. I have little use and patience for patriotic symbols and ceremonies, even myths, but I do have affinities and a sense of gaining or losing life quality if parts of the natural or cultural environment I feel closer to are replaced by foreign ones. One can be more at home in his class, among people with a similar education and values, no matter where they come from, but those won't ever be one's only affinities. To feel understood, to communicate a bit more effortlessly, one needs varying degrees of things familiar. Those things belong to a wider universe than one can carry around with him, like an inner backpack – but it still is a limited and defined universe. If some call it nation, it's their choice of words, but whatever you call it, it's more than fiction. Unless everything human is either physiology or fiction. My two pennies. Variety is great, and I'll always try to walk behind the immediate horizon and hang out among new people and look if I can find there what I cannot find at home, whatever home means; but if I go too far, I feel the pull and if I have the luck to hava a home to come back to, I'll be happy to be back. At least for a while. Arminden (talk) 01:45, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong. I'm not repudiating myths. Indeed, to the contrary, I live by them. Some of the most important events in my life occurred because of the way I read what I experience in terms of them: when my new companion and I glanced at a poster mentioning the Aeneid, and she expressed an interest, I burst forth on an impromptu disquisition at the corner of Piazza Venezia while we awaited a No.46 bus, underlining my then strong dislike of Vergil's epic. I noticed how at one point, her eyes sparkled. Analysing this some months later, when in Australia, I realized that she had intuited something in my abstract critique of the book, and I managed to elicit the subtext, which I wasn't quite aware of, namely, that my outburst jumped on a core myth of the Aeneid that bore an analogy to my situation at that time. My future Lavinia turned out to be a reality far more congruent with my own deepest self than Dido, not a fallback, as it is in Vergil's text. This mode of reasoning has been with me since I was exposed to Biblical stories and Greek myths from an early age. I've been out all morning, but your concentric circles image urges greater reflection, since it spurred a cascade of memories, the first of which was this. I heard a knocking on my door in my digs in Osaka as I was reading Lévi-Strauss (a volume which a girl there thought was a history of jeans). Opening it, I found five Papuan fellows, looking tense, asking if I was, as someone had told them, an Australian. 'Geez. Yu blokes look like yu'd relish a stubbie or two, eh! Come in.' The anxieties on all five faces dissolved, as they herded into my cramped quarters smiling. They were scholarship lads on a technical training course, and were all at sea in this oriental world, unable to communicate with anyone. The mere sound of a broad Aussie accent, more or less similar to theirs, made them feel suddenly anchored in friendly waters. I always thought of Australians in New Guinea as colonial arseholes. For them, it was the accent of their home, since they all had different tribal backgrounds, and used it as the default language among themselves.Nishidani (talk) 13:22, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Age kills off so much of anyone's Heimat. How much more can one allow himself to lose? I will probably never know what needs to happen for me to go to war for it, but that's my conflict; others sit more comfortably within themselves. People with stricter and shorter self-definitions, maybe. Or even complex ones, but with a closed end. We all need a Heimat, be it just one person. Whatever has that kind of stringency is far above fiction. Hell is not just the others, hell is not having a Heimat. Which might be the same, as it throws you totally among the others, but it has its distinctly own shape. Arminden (talk) 13:46, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Good grief! Hi mate. . .that untranslatable 'Heimat' evokes so much that passes beyond the reach of English, esp. for its vast philosophical and literary resonances, (we all immediately twig to the whispering shade of Nietzsche with his:' Als Zarathustra dreissig Jahr alt war, verliess er seine Heimat und den See seiner Heimat und ging in das Gebirge. Hier genoss er seines Geistes und seiner Einsamkeit und wurde dessen zehn Jahre nicht müde). I don't think of loss, but aggregation, when thinking of Heimat or identity. With age I increasingly feel a stranger in the country I grew up in, like a revivified fossil lumbering past his Jurassic period of extinction. If I recite Ian Mudie's They'll Tell You About Me there, most people a generation younger than I scrabble to catch the allusions which everyone knew when I grew up. I'm not questioning love of one's country: I love mine (but the 'mine' is, by now, several). Heimat in the sense you use it, I too have. It is not a geophysical reality, but a landscape of memory I dwell in, but not as in the early stages of mourning, with a sense of the grief of loss, but rather to evoke the beauty humour pathos of a unique, because personal, lived past, which, as Faulkner stated, 'is never dead. It's not even past,' until one passes. You are far richer in this dimension than I - with equal native fluency in at least four languages and cultures which you can call home, in differing senses and degrees. Thank your lucky stars, friend. Nishidani (talk) 16:36, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm thanking them whenever they start blinking. The problem is with losing the firm ground on which to stand. Too many can mean none, makes finding a partner in conversation much harder, and life is a conversation. As you say, time lets the pool increasingly dry out anyway, a perplex expression when one opens up, or even when he says a joke he considers anthological, can easily finish a relationship. Your encounter was possible because Vergilius was not an obstacle, or at least there was an ease there of seeing through the erudition and nailing what was personal behind it. That's hard to find even with a relatively similar upbringing. You can widen your Heimat and gain immensely; the problem starts when that puts you on an island others are not likely to reach, or even look for. Btw, it's some degree of fluency in three languages, out of my own fears or stupidity, but one can improve. I need to like the music before I start to learn an instrument, and that might take too long in my case.

Such a contrast: our chat here about what should be, and Tsar Deadfishovich starting again the traditional mass killing not so far away, making clear how we've misspent the real-world chances of the last 4 centuries or so to take the Cossack, hussar, or any type of cockaded cavalry off their horse. Arminden (talk) 17:07, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Fuck Putain and BidetBiden.

Ōsugi Sakae once wrote, before policde thugs murdered him for his culpability for the Kanto earthquake seismic event, that the evolution of conversation followed a trajectory from long monologues to short dialogues. In the end one stages duologues alone: On se promène, lisant au livre de soi-même. We read , or rather, man historically used to read, because conversation generally in real time is functional to bartering, social grooming, entertainment, killing time, negotiating to advantage to avoid open conflict, asserting one’s honour, etc., and has little to do with the pursuit of intellectual pleasures. 95% of the communicative content in human exchanges, if my memory of a book on sociolinguistics I read in 1965 does not err, is sleeved in the slight tics of body language, and the gaze. And that’s fine. Informed by good manners, careful listening and sparring wit, even such, in computer theory, human noise in the message can prove to be more functional to a decent society than highfalutin conversation itself.

Silent reading changed all that: our interlocutors are mostly in books, the dialogue of the self with other selves as they distil their experience in succinct forms, propositional, philosophical, historical or aesthetic. So, the cultivation of that moribund social art in this venue is not isolating – it’s more devastatingly delusional to write on twitter or social media in the expectation that the world will pause. Real agoric communities are rare, and faute de mieux one must, in their place, create an inner world of discursive robinsonnading. As a boy I immediately recognized the truth worth of what Renan wrote in his Souvenirs d’Enfance et de Jeunesse (1883 Nelson/Calmann-Lévy ed) p.282) ‘.On peut être à Paris bien plus seul qu'au fond d'un désert’, a point underlined soon after when I read Newman’s Apologia pro vita sua and encountered there an anecdote. The provost of Oriel, Edward Copleston, on observing the freshman Newman walking out on his own with a somewhat lonely air, reformulated in Church latin a passage from Cicero’s De Republica as a suggestive compliment by murmuring his way:’Numquam minus solus quam cum solus sum.’(Never less alone than when on one’s own.p.16) These phrases of course come back to caress me in recent times, as a solace. At a certain phase in life, a cat or dog becomes the only secure, 'humane' warmth life might withhold from one. And that is good, for however nice civil society might have been, it is tacitly premised in modernity on the extermination of the creaturely world.Nishidani (talk) 23:01, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

​Who said I'm in constant pursuit of intellectual pleasure? I'm not. I'm coming across people who seem to be at different degrees of satisfaction with life who are even much less into that kind of pursuit than me. There are plenty of much more earthly needs, like talking to one's child, or staying in touch with friends one needs or who themselves need a word or a deed. We're all, without even noticing it, fighting our old boxing or chess matches even when a new basketball or backgammon game is being offered. Everybody in the end seems to need a resonant chamber more than they need a dialogue, but not always. I'm still trying to learn my way out, but that's my problem. Have a good night, my friend. Arminden (talk) 00:29, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

‘Intellectual pleasure’ – the sensual awareness of things and how to negotiate our paths through real life routines,-covers the phenomenology of everyday life down to the most recondite crannies of the banal. Let me illustrate. The laconic friend whom I accompanied yesterday as he drove round to have his weekly clinical tests, stopped at the usual spot for a pee. Coming out, he joined me for a smoke, and, as he always remarks, every week, on doing so there, said appreciatively: ’This parking area is really clean.’ And I of course (while he pees I light up and observe the landscape and what’s happening in it) replied: ‘The cleaning lass here is meticulous. She not only keeps the toilets spick and span every hour, but sweeps the whole length of the curve regularly outside.’ Time to move off. I stubbed my fag and went over to a neat bin, with its ashtray, and dropped the butt there. Turning, I saw him flick his onto the asphalt before getting back into the car.’ Clearly, he doesn’t ‘listen’, to others, or to himself.

A grandfather who picks up his grandson from school everyday always stops over at the bar on his walk with him homewards. He grumbles as he sips a coffee, despite his extreme protectiveness for the child, that the boy is bright but disattentive at school, hyperactive, vocal only when talking of new toys to replace the ones he has, but otherwise constantly practicing with his skateboard in the square, or breaking things at home. One notes that the younger boy is the cynosure of all attention, that the daily excursion to school with the elder boy requires grandpa to also take the youngest in a pram. One makes hypotheses. Is there a link between the fussiness that everyone sheds on the baby and the first grandson’s behavior?. If so, how can a mere friend help out without intrusively meddling in what is a family manner. Invent a casual wordgame for English vocab to describe a skateboard etc. Then over a month, slowly apprize his quick response to new words, and suggest he’ll be so good than he can become his younger brother’s teacher, since he is the grown-up. Just a chancy unobtrusive way of trying to mend a young manner without obviously wanting to barge into what is a family’s private life. Recently, I noticed that he’s become proud of taking over from his grandfather by pushing his brother’s pram. A lot of practical life requires the same intensity of abstract thinking one uses to master an intellectual discipline, but leaves no dour odour of the lucubrations involved.Nishidani (talk) 13:51, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Beautiful. Note to self: move back out of the cave. Arminden (talk) 14:36, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

​If the guy below does indeed do me the favour and helps me quit this "toxic relationship" I got myself into, Wikimania, and if you want to keep up the chat - a line once in a while -, Zero has my email. Attempting "suicide by cop", since I don't manage otherwise. Some people I really don't care sharing the same space with, that's the other upside of it. Take good care mate, Arminden (talk) 22:55, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

History of Palestine

"Leave hate & knee-jerk at the door & you'll live longer". Seriously? Ordinarily I ignore fools and am not normally given to invective but I might make an exception. Next time, take the trouble to visit the prior discussions before prating.Selfstudier (talk) 22:26, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Look, I don't know you, but I got a good enough impression from a few lines of yours. You're driven. An activist. I've had my fare share of those and need no more. I'll stay away from you as much as I can – I'm not going to ask for any favours from one like you, but it would be best if you also kept your distance. And btw, I do insist: learn to READ before you revert. And I don't just mean distinguishing letters and words on a page. Now do me a favour and ban me. Arminden (talk) 22:46, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Aman (Islam) moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Aman (Islam), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:19, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

To Onel5969.

1) I always act based on the principle "do what's best for the user". You don't. I came to create this STUB because the term "aman/amān" is a major concept in Islam and shows up on lots of enWiki pages (see list below at (x); there might be more, the list is the result of just a cursory search. There are probably lots of references there, somebody will pick them up, there is no OBLIGATION for me to do it). As I have explained to you recently, I use stubs and red links because they are incentives for editors to add to the topics; their creation/use is supported by enWiki rules, not prohibited. Also, you cannot force ME to add material MYSELF, it is absolutely legitimate to create stubs and use red links and leave it to others to expand on them. I have also taken the 2nd step in order to insure that this indeed happens, by linking the stub to other closely related pages, which can be done by "see also"s, redirects and wikilinks. All 100% logical, user-friendly, and correct.

2) If BRILL's Encyclopaedia of Islam isn't THE best RS, reliable source, I don't know what is. "can't be referenced"?! It IS already! This is bullying and baseless destruction of useful work.

This looks like hounding. Please stop. I sincerely don't have the patience & state of mind, energy, and time to edit-war with you over self-evident matters. Please stay away of my editing space when things aren't clear mistakes which harm the user. I won't go into endless discussions over narcissistically overblown non-issues.

Please explain who you are. What is your authority on enWiki that allows you to take this step?

(x) Articles quickly found: Aman Ali, Al-Hafiz, Divisions of the world in Islam, Fatimid conquest of Egypt, Futuwwa, Glossary of Islam (see "Fī ʾAmān allāh"), Hudna, Kedah Dar ul-Aman, Kingdom of Africa, Mirza Basheer-ud-Din Mahmood Ahmad, Muhammad ibn Qasim, Musta'min, Ridwan ibn Walakhshi, Sulh, Tahdiya.

Also, "Dar-ul-aman", also spelled "darul aman", lit. "house of aman (protection)", is the term used for "women's shelters" in Pakistan and Afghanistan, as you can see via the article Punjab Women Protection Authority. There are literally dozens of articles on the topic at The Express Tribune (https://tribune.com.pk) if you search for "dar-ul-aman". Arminden (talk) 14:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Learn WP policies and guidelines. The issue is not that the article is a stub, the issue is that the stub is little more than a dictionary definition (see WP:NOTDIC). And the greater issue is that there is not nearly enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to show that it passes WP:GNG. Just because something exists does not mean it passes notability criteria. And you might also want to check out WP:CIVIL. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:25, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Onel5969: You didn't reply.

1) How did you action help the user?

2) Why did you ignore the reference, BRILL's Encyclopaedia of Islam, claiming that the stub "can't be referenced" even though it was, as a mater of fact?

3) What gives you the authority to remove the stub?

4) Are you kidding? Is now "notability" the reason? I don't even take that serious, but are you familiar with the concept of "moving the goalposts", or are you practicing it just out of a reflex, kind of "speaking in prose without knowing it"?

I make a clear distinction in life between FORMAL politeness and ACTUAL politeness. Those who are ACTUALLY rude are always abusing the concept of FORMAL civility. ACTUAL politeness means: serving the other, doing what's right. Anything else is rhetoric and sophisms, i.e. deception/smoke & mirrors.

PS: Answer this to yourself, don't bother with me. Arminden (talk) 14:52, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I agree with the points that Onel5969 raises, including that the draft is not currently suitable for mainspace. MrsSnoozyTurtle 10:08, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

MrsSnoozyTurtle, hi. 1) Hounding isn't nice. 2) You didn't take to heart my main message: serve the user, not bureaucracy. 3) You've missed the train - Aman (Islam). Please, let's drop this. Arminden (talk) 12:00, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Mobileye help

Hi Arminden, my name is Gideon, nice to meet you. I'm hoping to improve the Mobileye article, and, being an employee of the company myself, am only able to suggest changes. I've started a discussion at Talk:Mobileye and have posted a pretty extensive draft at User:Gideon at Mobileye/Mobileye suggestions, and am hoping to engage some quality editors. I noticed that you are quite active and thorough, and seem to have an interest in Israeli topics, so thought you might be interested in checking this out. Looking forward to discussing with you! Gideon at Mobileye (talk) 11:53, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

​Gideon, hi. Sorry, but I really have no connection whatsoever to, or clue about, hi tech, economy, start-ups, etc. Good luck! Arminden (talk) 18:02, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Ahem

Talk:Wadi Ara, Haifa, cheers, Huldra (talk) 21:05, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Huldra, hi. I had almost hoped you'd just throw it out. I'm now dealing with it. Some normality is returning, weird and sad to say it in such horrible times, but I'll definitely have less time for Wiki. And that's the good news. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 18:59, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Huldra. Only now did I notice that we have Wadi Ara and Wadi Ara, Haifa. I'm not yet at an age where Alzheimer would be the first worry, so I don't know... I've shaved off a bit more of the text, hopefully it's more acceptable now. Even more fundamental: I realised that me or whoever put En Esur on that page probably didn't check if the ancient site is indeed on lands formerly owned by the village; maybe you can do that? It probably is, considering the water sources, but better make sure. Covid times are almost over and me hanging out on Wiki will get much less as well, thankfully. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 22:03, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Well, the "Tell el Asawir" is located about 1km NW of Wadi Ara, Haifa, so I think it is ok to have some info there. Wadi Ara is a valley, I would think that even the present co-ord in that article are far too precise, Huldra (talk) 22:30, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

It's not just a valley, it's one of the most strategically important "mountain" passes in the whole country (steep sloped hills, no real mountains there, at most the Carmel would count in Europe as such). And it's quite long and winding, so indicating one single spot is nonsense. Giving the entry and exit point of the pass makes sense, plus where the wadi flows into a bigger one or the Med, and probably the main spring. Not easy.

What's that photo doing there? Did it win the Great Wiki Kitsch Contest and the right to be posted online? But that's not our main concern. Arminden (talk) 23:14, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Huldra, this is becoming very specific and relevant for that article. I hope you won't have anything against moving the essential part of our exchange to that talk-page. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 11:46, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Shapira Scroll

Hi. Might you weigh in on the issue of a balanced view of modern scholarship regarding the Shapira Scrolls? An editor has been repeatedly undoing sourced contributions to the article. See Talk:Shapira_Scroll#Vandalism 2A0D:6FC2:43D0:9200:E937:E791:388B:D1B (talk) 12:26, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

@2A0D:6FC2:43D0:9200:E937:E791:388B:D1B: Hi. I am interested in Shapira's story as such, but I'm in no position to assess how plausible Dershowitz & Co. really are, and apart from that, every hour I'm spending on Wiki feels more and more like it were stolen from matters that I really should prioritise. Sorry. By the way, getting a Wiki account would really help. Arminden (talk) 21:46, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Levantine Arabic FAC

Hi Arminden, I nominated Levantine Article for FAC. As you contributed to Levant in the past, I thought you could be interested in reviewing this nomination. Thanks for any help you can provide. A455bcd9 (talk) 08:14, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi A455bcd9. I am honoured, but I am in no position to comment on this topic. I used the opportunity to read parts of the article and learn from it, so thank you for pointing it out to me. It does look well-written, but that's all I am able to say. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 08:57, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me. No worries, I understand. I'm glad you liked the article. Have a good day. A455bcd9 (talk) 09:58, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Citing the Source

Hi, Arminden. Your question to me concerning the article City of David (historic) and the source that says it is a "holy city unto Jews, Muslims and Christians" is taken from the book, Hurvitz, Gila; Shiloh, Yigal (1999). The City of David: Discoveries from the Excavations. Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem. p. 6. OCLC 610542128.. I will need to review my old notes on this subject and when I find the exact quote I can post it here for you to see, as I am currently prohibited to comment on articles with the Arab-Israeli tag, until further notice. Be well.Davidbena (talk) 14:09, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

@Davidbena: Thanks David. Didn't know, sorry to hear. I'm trying to stay away, but when I need an information and don't find it in the article, I find myself sucked back in. Just a little. Take care and enjoy the summer! Arminden (talk) 14:26, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

@Arminden:, Shalom. I just now found the source that you are looking for. Hurvitz's and Shiloh's exact words are these: [page 6] "The City of David, a place holy to Jews, Christians and Moslems, is the place marking the old delineation of the bounds of Jerusalem, located on the south eastern hill of contemporary Jerusalem. In shape, it is elongated, somewhat low lying hill which served as the capital of the United Kingdom of the tribes of Israel, and later as the capital of the Kingdom of Judah." (End Quote). I hope that this was helpful.Davidbena (talk) 17:59, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

@Davidbena: Thank you. It sure is helpful as such. I am very surprised though by the content and still do have a big problem with the statement that "[t]he City of David [is] a place holy to Jews, Christians and Moslems". Why would that be? The Temple Mount or at least the Holy of Holies is holy to Jews, full stop (Shechina), but the CoD? Unless one starts believing that crazy, by now not even fringe theory about the Temple standing above the Gihon Spring. Christians never regarded the CoD as holy. Muslims don't either. I see it as one of those introductory phrases that were either written w/o much thought by the archaeologists who wanted to get on and present the actual findings, or as a mistranslation. Do you have any opinion on that? Thanks again, Arminden (talk) 18:08, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

If we were to approach this subject from a pure "traditional" view point, Jews hold that Jerusalem (that is, the Old Jerusalem) is the place where God chose to put His Name, hence, where King David chose as his seat of government and where it was revealed to him that the Temple would be built in that city. In fact, prior to the Temple's construction in Jerusalem, it was permitted to offer sacrifices anywhere in the country (known as the "bamot"). After the Temple was constructed, it became thenceforth forbidden to sacrifice outside of Jerusalem's Temple Mount. All this is explained in our Jewish codes of law. Moreover, the consecrated tithes could ONLY be eaten within the walled city of Jerusalem, but nowhere outside of those walls. This takes us beyond the limited scope of the Temple Mount. As for Muslims, Jerusalem is the place where they believe Mohammed went up into heaven, hence, its importance to them. As for the Christians, you'll have to ask them what the city means to them. It is generally accepted that Jerusalem (the Old City) has special sanctity. Just for the record, see Mishnah Kelim 1:8. It speaks about the sanctity of Jerusalem from a Jewish perspective.Davidbena (talk) 21:01, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

@Davidbena: Wait. I was making a clear distinction between Jerusalem as a whole, and specifically the City of David as defined geographically in the article. (Actually, for how long did the name City of David hold?) That, and the concept of a place being holy, and even more: of a holy place. Not at all the same. Your explanations leave a narrow possibility of some kind of holiness in Judaism, although a) many would contradict whether an explicit concept of holiness can be applied to a place, and if yes, if it could be extended to the whole city, and b) the exclusivity of the Jerusalem Temple was only legalised under Hezekiah, so the time frame might narrow down (and the city's geographical extent with it, as it grew massively after the fall of Israel/Samaria).

Christians are yet to adopt the City of David as anything of religious relevance. Too much is contested about the site for it to become canonised in any way. I guess that goes for Judaism and Islam, as well. Also, there's no reason to look for Jesus there, and holiness of sites connected to the Old Testament is seldom a topic (I've mentioned why Mamre is an exception). Just look for churches at sites not connected to the New Testament and Christian saints and tell me what you found.

For Muslims there are concentric areas of sanctity of some kind, but Haram esh-Sharif is the holy place. Orthodox Islam is quite dismissive of inflationary holiness, I believe Shi'a Islam is a bit more flexible, and folk religion is a different matter altogether. For Muslims even Muhammad is no more than a Prophet, of which there are many, and holy to all Muslims are actually the holy sites in Mecca and Medina. David/Daoud had an early shrine at the Tower of David near Jaffa Gate, but it's been largely forgotten.

So very shaky grounds in my opinion, if one speaks academically. For popular beliefs and the wider tourist population, everything is holy and fair game for advertisement. Arminden (talk) 22:52, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Well, our authors spoke of the City of David as being Jerusalem. It's that and no more. Of course, Jerusalem has grown since the time of King David. If you want to say that Jerusalem is not holy to the three monotheistic religions, you would have to cite sources for that. Our authors have expressed an opinion which is generally accepted to be true, from a pure cultural and/or religious point of view. Be well.Davidbena (talk) 00:35, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

@Davidbena: thank you David. You've given me the quotation and have offered me your arguments.

To me, the proof is in the pudding: holyness is a matter of religion, and there are clear signs for how religious decisionn makers manifest their belief. There is no single synagogue or church there, and the only mosque (late 19th c.) is not a holy place shrine as far as I know. The Pool of Siloam is the only candidate to possible former religious glory. Has water been drawn there for the Temple? Maybe, probably. Has there been a church there? Yes, an important one (at the "wrong" site), only during the Byzantine period and never again. Are there any manifestations of worship around the CoD area, like processions, mass prayers, anything? No. Is there any relative certainty about the identification there of any concrete holy site (where the venerated event A or B has taken place)? Possibly one, Jesus healing the blind - if the loeer pool is indeed the site. But that's the pool, no City of David area holiness beyond that resulting from it. So...

Even archaeologists can't help closing any single argument; a city wall and gate on the west would be essential, but hasn't been found yet.

So no, beyond the general degree of holiness of the city of Jerusalem, of which this area was a part of at different specific times, neither the relevant religious institutions, nor the religious public seem to see the City of David area as holy. That was my point. And "holy site" is, as I said, an even sharper concept. So I'm yet to see the light. I would never argue against the Temple Mount, the Holy Sepulchre, the Mount of Olives; here I do. But that's strictly my problem :) Thanks again for taking the time and effort! Cheers, Arminden (talk) 07:04, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

​ David, may I link the CoD talk page to this discussion, or did we somehow infringe on the I/P block issue? We probably covered here every aspect relevant to the topic, it certainly enriched me, but it shouldn't go to waste for the others and mainly for that article. What do you think? If need be, I can rework our exchange and present both sides under my name, but that would be first unfair to your contribution and in-depth knowledge, and secondly - a lot of wasted time, but that's secondary and I'll do as you say. Thank you, Arminden (talk) 09:02, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, you can link this discussion to the CoD Talk Page, if you wish to do so, but I cannot do that.Davidbena (talk) 12:27, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Minor note

2 years ago you edited Tishbe amplifying material written by another editor that mentions Todd Bolen and Upper Gilead Bolen is a creationist teaching at a Creationist university, and that's his website. I've deleted the material sourced to him. It's so easy to miss this sort of thing, and he and his site look to be used quite a bit. I'm wasting precious time fixing it. Doug Weller talk 16:18, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

​Doug, thank you, I'll keep it in mind. He's very active, and like many Protestant maximalists (which I didn't notice he is, true & thanks), he's keeping up to date with archaeological news and posts them. That's sometimes very useful. If and when it is used as a tool for advancing a creationist agenda, it becomes fishy, but that's always the problem. One can for instance hardly deal with biblical archaeology - horribile dictu! - without applying to Leen Ritmeyer, who often dialogues & networks with Bolen (see for instance here). I don't want to become a McCarthyist, but I definitely need to be aware on who stands where, to keep out POV, so it's great you told me. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 15:38, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Glad to be of help. Yes, I've noticed that he does keep up with news. I'm not happy with Ritmeyer's article. "Solid scientific research" (in quotes). "He discovered archaeological evidence for the location of Solomon's Temple, the emplacement of the Ark of the Covenant on the Foundation Stone," with this as a source? Editing it himself? Doug Weller talk 16:05, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

And created by a puppet master. Doug Weller talk 16:06, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Ritmeyer: the article says that he "discovered archaeological evidence" for this and that, and he has, as archaeological evidence goes. Not proof, for sure, but always well-informed, and most of it quite plausible speculation. We can change it to something like "researched existing data about the Temple Mount in order to find evidence for..., which he claims he has."

His son is active online, and his blog has many followers, so any one of them could have edited it. He himself has signed with his full name, and I have no problem with a person adding his birthday and titles to the list of books he published. No comments, just facts. He removed the mention of the Christadelphian Church, which is fair enough, as there was no ref for that.

"Solid scientific research" probably yes, at least as long as he was part of the excavation team. He knows the rules of the academic research game, everybody dealing with these subjects is using a lot of imaginative arguments, so it's hard to take that away from him. The touchstone usually is if Finkelstein bothered to reply, and what he said. Did he, ever?

Puppet master? That was back in 2009, since then a lot has happened on the page. Arminden (talk) 20:06, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

True, creator is irrelevant. But “ solid scientific research“ is hype and unsourced, right? If no one replies is it undue? Doug Weller talk 20:14, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Actually it is sourced. Now I'll fix the page as well (mainly p. 77 last paragraph, not 78). All kosher there. Read on and you'll see how Ritmeyer compartimentalises scientific work and private faith, and that's fully legitimate. The author is very much on the anti-fundamentalist side, and the publisher is perfectly reputable. Arminden (talk) 21:23, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes but we don't use quotations without attribution. I'd prefer "When archeologists speak today of solid scientific research on the Temple’s location, they’re most likely to refer to Leen Ritmeyer." as a quote. I don't think that means "best known for" either. Thanks for pointing out it's sourced. Doug Weller talk 06:47, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Who Wrote That?

[11] and mw:Who Wrote That? Doug Weller talk 13:53, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

​Thanks Doug, very useful, saves a lot of time. I hope you're doing well. Take care, Arminden (talk) 09:22, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Managed to get on my gym quality treadmill I've hardly used and walk .2km. Not far but an achievement, esp in this heat. It's brilliant! Doesn't always work for some reason. Doug Weller talk 10:14, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

​My total respect for that. I'm trying to keep up a minimal regime of exercise, and fail miserably. I admire you all the more. All my best wishes to you, Arminden (talk) 15:25, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Wadi Qana

Hey, A. Sorry to bother you, but could you spare a drop from your in loco erudition to look at this (and the related Elkana page), together with the linked page in Benvenisti. Don't bother to get dragged back into the moil. Is there anywhere in Israel or I/Pland generally a nahal elkana? Best regards, whatever your results Nishidani (talk) 21:38, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

​Hi N. Upset? I hope not with me. I'm far from any kind of erudition, I'm just pasting stuff together. No false modesty, I just didn't read anywhere near enough.

I know nothing of such a stream. By using Morse's transliteration tool & Ggl Translate, I found an article on Hebrew Wiki called Nahal Kana or Qana. It starts with

"Nahal Qana (Arabic: وادي قانا) is the northern one of the tributaries [sic, Ggl] of the Yarkon. The source of the stream is near Akraba, east of Itamar, in eastern Samaria."

Akraba is some 10 km ESE of Huwara, where the Wadi Qana article places the spring. A small tributary can account for the difference.

It also has a section called "Mention in the Bible":

"The Nahal Kana mentioned in the Bible was used as a border between the land of the tribe of Ephraim and the land of the tribe of Manasseh[4]. It is also mentioned in connection with the fact that members of the tribe of Ephraim received plots of land on the other side of Nahal Cana, within the territory of the tribe of Manasseh."

Note 4 = Joshua 16:8. New International Version: "From Tappuah the border went west to the Kanah Ravine and ended at the Mediterranean Sea. This was the inheritance of the tribe of the Ephraimites, according to its clans." KJV has "The border went out from Tappuah westward unto the river Kanah..."

It would take more search to find out how well the biblical River Kanah fits the location of Wadi Qana, but it's there in Joshua, and the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh are indeed separated at some point by the Yarkon (see Aphek on the map, and that's now Tel Afek at the springs of the Yarkon). Kana(h) is more or less the ENE (upstream) continuation of the Yarkon, all the way to Huwara.

From one comment ("Political parties see the declaration of nature reserves as a method of narrowing the Palestinian space") you can see that at least one editor is rather pro-Pal, but from here to thinking that the entire article is called by the Arabic name, if there is a widely used Hebrew one, it a big step. Since 2006 there's even an "Administration for the Rehabilitation of Nahal Kana". There is a whole section on the "Nahal Kana Reserve" (שמורת נחל קנה). Morse has "קנה" for Kana, and "אלקנה , אלכנה" for Elkana. There can be no unintentional misunderstanding.

So Benvenisti seems to be wrong - twice: for all I can tell w/o looking for direct sources, so just by ways of OR, this might well be the biblical River Kanah, or at least there was such a name in SE Samaria in OT times; and whether the Naming Commission proposed Elkana or not, it never caught on, as it often doesn't.

I don't know if this helps, but the West Bank never attracted me in such detail. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 22:51, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

No, I wasn't upset. To the contrary, I was embarrassed to call on you for assistance because I know that place is stressful for you, and I know that if someone asks for an inch of erudition, you go a full mile. Thanks for all of those edits, very improving. I have proposed a solution to the Benvenisti crux. We had 12,000 Arabic toponyms for Palestine, and most fell from use in modern times, but Benvenisti's father and his papers no doubt contain masses of information not formally published, so I am reluctant to mess with his erudition, even when it is not crystal clear. Of course, Quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus but I think rephrasing the footnote in a way that the point he makes doesn't necessarily refer to our Wadi Qana, but illustrates a principle active in that area's descriptions, allows us to keep a piece of curious information as a prompt for further research. Best as always and I hope life's treating you well in these troubled times.Nishidani (talk) 11:57, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

​Nishi-san, that's all fine, if you just drop the erudition bit. 90% of what I put together was just that - put together from the Net. I failed to read the article & discussion and missed much of the point and what had been said already, but this way I learned something. I am sure that Gsueso2 is right, his OR is as good, or actually better, than mine. My ancient PC can't open the document he found, but his explanation clarifies things perfectly: Benvenisti is and remains reliable, it's just a different Wadi Qana. Just look under Cana#Locating Cana and mainly check out Conder, who clarifies the transliteration, and in the end effect etymological differences, between the many, MANY Kannas and Qanas originally spelt with either kaf or qof. There are so many reedy brooks & ponds! Unless you want to push, come what may, yet another I/P point (Hebraisation of place names) on a page which is already saturated with very real and local Israeli assaults on Palestinian rights and needs no such unrelated support, I would drop it or move it elsewhere, where it belongs. Here it just doesn't.

Thank you, I'm fine, which I really hope you are too. If these times are troubled, I wonder how you'll call those to come, soon, but it's still to a point up to us how we swim or drown. Arminden (talk) 19:00, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

I won't be around 'for those times to come' and lack prophetic gifts. Everyday over a sundowner I watch, between reading and chatting, the street flow of youth. And reflect on AlphaZero's win over some variant of a Deep Blue chess programme in 2017. Reportedly,AZ won because it has scrapped defensive play, dispensing with lines of moves whose logic was dictated by prioritizing protecting one's queen. AZ would sacrifice the queen, if deeper logic could find a line that would transform the loss into a positional advantage which would kill black or white, as the case may be. This impressed militaries the world over. If one dispenses with any form of ethical self-restraint by for example creating software in the automated panoply of attack missiles that cannot be overriden by human judgment, statistically there is a greatly enhanced possibility of 'winning'. Translate that into any competitive marketing system - which is almost inevitable - and the consequences for mankind are obvious. The gecko spawn, that makes walking in my house something akin to tiptoeing over a minefield, and their kind have better prospects.Nishidani (talk) 20:51, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Stepovers

Thanks for bringing that up, it's one of those bits of terminology that has slipped through without effective linking and I think that I'm the guilty party in most if not all cases. I aim to rework strike-slip tectonics to include a section on stepovers that I can then link to. Cheers, Mikenorton (talk) 19:49, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Mikenorton, hi. Nobody is guilty of anything, we're just progressing step by step :) I see there are piles of articles about the football trick, they just took over the term completely. Keep up the good work! Cheers, Arminden (talk) 20:09, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Khan al-Tujjar (Nablus)

Hello, Arminden,

I don't understand your speedy deletion tag on this page. Right now, it states that you want to move the page "Remove" to this page title. You should use Twinkle and go TW>CSD>G6 Move and, in the field provided, add the name of the page you want moved to this title. I don't think any admin will take action on your request because it's not clear what you want done. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:32, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Liz

Thanks, I'm not good with templates, but Ponyo has understood what I meant and did the deed. Thank you for taking the time and for your patience! Arminden (talk) 20:58, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

ARBPIA

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a required notice, and I realize you have a distaste for me right now, but I dont have much of a choice of leaving this here if this is going to be escalated further. So Im sorry for appearing on your talk page, but again dont have much of a choice here if you are going to continue to violate WP:WESTBANK. nableezy - 15:58, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Adelante, comandante! No pasarán! Arminden (talk) 16:30, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Im not sure why you are just so adamant on dismissing every comment of mine that disagrees with yours. You dont even engage with the topic, you just say stuff like crusading and pre-Palestinian proto-Occupation entities. You dont even attempt to address what I actually say, just casually dismissing anything I utter as beneath you and your time entirely. Its just youre right, Im wrong, and that is self-evident. Hey Arminden, nableezy says, please look at MOS:FOREIGNITALICS. Never looks. Hey Arminden, look at WP:WESTBANK he says. Never looks. Doesnt even address the issue, that it isnt you placing Samaria as the location of a Biblical stream, in a non-anachronistic fashion. No, its youre placing the current location of a current stream as being in a place currently known as Samaria, which our guideline expressly forbids. Never engages. You just treat me as beneath you entirely and unworthy of your time or consideration. So fine, I am going to correct the WP:WESTBANK violation again later. If you return it then I will report you. People I think incredibly highly of think very highly of you. I generally think highly of you. But even if you think I am beneath you, my arguments here are not, and you cannot simply ignore them and violate our policies and guidelines as though they only apply to those of us that lack your self-evidently higher level of intellect and purpose. nableezy - 16:53, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

My friend, I cannot fight windmills, that is not condescending, it is the pure reality. I sometimes know where my limits are and what fights are not possible to fight. I have given all my arguments, as edit summary or on talk pages. Like there at Kanah: Qana is identified with Kanah because it is where Kanah is supposed to be: in Samaria. The context is biblical. You can accept this logic, or turn around with sophisms and strict adherence to rules which, I cannot repeat more often than I have, are made by editors like us with a good purpose in mind, but can be turned on their head when used ad litteram and against the spirit standing behind them. When somebody obviously smart like you doesn't seem to acknowledge even that much, it seems certain that it's not by mistake, not because you cannot grasp what I say, nor because you think it's intrinsically wrong - but because you are driven by a cause. That deserves respect in a struggle, but not in a dispute like this. I have grown up defining good guys as those who are not activists. Active people, who struggle against the odds - yes, but not activists who follow the flag and kick aside the individual and those standing in the way by thinking differently. That's ingrained in me, and I have my antennas for activism. You might not recognise yourself in this picture, but I can't help trusting my entire life experience, either. You cannot ignore what I say, in plain words and in well-considered ways, and hit back with abbreviations. Yes, I do ignore them; I don't ignore their spirit, which tries to create fairness and an equal playing field. But I most honestly, really, as a matter of existential and day-to-day fact, don't have the time for what I'm doing now, I am disappointing family & friends as well as people who depend on me professionally by putting time into this, and what happens is - there's no dialogue, just being hit over the head with empty shells covered in abbreviations. I can't have that, sorry. So go ahead, "do what you can't let not be done" as a German saying goes, I'll live my life and stay away from this as much as I can, and you'll fight on for the causes you find deserving. No bad blood. And if you know anything about Nishidani, if he's allright, I'd appreciate if you could share that with me - and send him my regards. Take care my friend. Arminden (talk) 17:33, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

You know I wouldnt have a problem with saying Kanah is believed to be in Samaria right? That this wouldnt violate WP:WESTBANK, that it isnt claiming Samaria is the current name of a current place. But thats just it, you dont engage with me, you just say Im wrong. You just think its because of some cause. What do you think the cause is here? Anti-anachronistic? Or just Palestinian nationalist? You see me putting Tel Aviv is in occupied Palestine? It isnt fair of you to say my objection to saying "Wadi Qana is in Samaria" to mean that I am arguing for calling the Kingdom of Israel pre-Palestinian proto-Occupation entities. Its this level of dismissiveness with what I am actually saying to make a caricature of my argument to fit this idea that it is based on some Electronic Intifida inspired quest. I am not ignoring what you say and hitting back with abbreviations. WP:WESTBANK was the result of an incredibly acrimonious arbitration case, one that saw a number of editors banned. And the resulting consensus has stopped such acrimony in its tracks since. My asking you to click that link and read the guidelines is not an unreasonable request. As far as Nish, the last Id heard from him was Sept 5, and had been wondering if all is well with him myself. Hopefully he'll turn up to tell us both to shut up sooner than later. He did tell me he had some travels coming up till around the end of the month though, so hopefully the absence isnt anything to worry about. nableezy - 17:42, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

No, I don't know that. I really don't. Samaria is a real name, biblical terms, like any historical geographic terms, live forever. And yes, I also know about the power of words. But we're talking about a "See also", for Christ's sake, and Samaria, as a shorthand for "northern Land of Israel" or "region of the lost ten tribes" or whatever, is the explanation why Qana is being mentioned, and it's a one-line explanation, not a manifesto, where so many editors are leaving "See also" items fully unexplained. And I've wasted what, over half an hour on this? With real people waiting for email answers from me and more than that. The Covid break is over. I did have arguments for the sake of arguing, or of having company, when time apparently stood still (and hell, it didn't!), but not now. The page is not on my list, do as you like, honestly. I might forget this all and bump into it in a year's time and edit Samaria back in, but because of forgetfulness - and because it belongs there -, but not in order to fight or upset you.

Thank you so much about sharing news about Nishidani, I truly appreciate that. Yep, telling us both off would be his right answer :)) Now you made me laugh, and thanks for that. Take care my friend, and if you do live anywhere close to where your Wiki name suggests you feel for, then stay out of harm's way. Arminden (talk) 18:04, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Im actually Egyptian, but I would love to see Nablus one day. All Im asking of you is that you not attribute to me motives that are purely conjecture, grant me the same good faith you want, the belief that my edits are motivated by a goal of adhering to our policies and guidelines and not some rank activist partisanship. That when I disagree with you that I am giving a reason that you should engage with instead of dismiss as "I/P bullshit". And I am not, nor have I ever, asking you to remove this or any other page from your watchlist. I hope you continue to expand it. I hope you place some sentence in the body about Kanah being believed to be in Samaria. Even after I remove that Wadi Qana is "in Samaria". nableezy - 20:14, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Nableezy. I won't have the time to act on it any time soon, but thanks for your kid words. Don't misunderstand me, I never had it on my watchlist. Have a good night, Arminden (talk) 20:29, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Mary, mother of Jesus has an RFC

Mary, mother of Jesus has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. — That Coptic Guy (talk) 17:14, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Apropos

this On this eve, as on others if I live on, I for one, from now on in, will raise a glass to you and chant a modification of the traditional augury by saying ‘Next year in Biserica Neagră!’ Cheers pal,

Have a good and serene NY Nishidani (talk) 15:05, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

​That's how you make an ole' heathen say Amen! Here's to you my friend! Arminden (talk) 15:29, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Julian calendar

I see you reinstated the "one day per 128 years" even though the discussion at talk:Julian calendar#Describing the divergence from Gregorian† casts serious doubt on that figure. You did not participate in that discussion. Would you please review it and explain why your edit should stand?

† ignore the misnomer, the question is divergence from solar. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:39, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

​Hi JMF. Sorry if I reinstated smth. that has been proven to be mathematically wrong, I thought you only offered a different angle of the same figure, and I consider it to be easier to grasp if we say how many years it takes to lose/gain 1 day, than how many full days are lost in 300 years (or was it 400?). For me, as a practically-minded person by nature and trade, as many users might also be, a simple formula is what I need most.

If the figure is not wrong, but only slightly off, I suggest you add circa/about/close to, if you don't mind, but leave it there as a useful approximation. Thanks, Arminden (talk) 11:52, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

400/3.1 = 129 and v small change. I will apply that. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:25, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Julius Wolff (mathematician)

Dear Arminden,

Thanks for your interest in professor Julius Wolff. You asked why Wolff was in Bergen-Belsen? I hope i have answered this question now in the article. Best wishes, Hansmuller (talk) 10:23, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Bibleverse

Hi, In 2020 you made this edit however you had also introduced an error in the {{bibleverse}} template, Could you please fix this ? Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 15:28, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Davey2010: hi. Davey, I've used the template dozens of times, for many years it has worked perfectly well. It connected to a modern English translation at Bible Gateway. More recently, it started stuttering, at least sometimes (if not always) it's showing up as a red-marked error tag, which again: it did NOT do for years on end. The mistake isn't mine. I've picked up the template from other editors and used it successfully until this year. Either a code has been changed at Wiki that introduced an unwanted glitch, or Bible Gateway has discontinued its cooperation with Wiki. If the former is the case, the Wiki code writers should urgently fix their mistake; if the latter, hundreds of links must be changed, which would be a huge pity, as other options are less elegant and convenient than the Bible Gateway pages. Do you know where to go to with this problem? Because I don't and also don't have the time. Thank you. Arminden (talk) 07:57, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Arminden, Ah in that case my apologies I thought you had introduced the error, I'm currently using WP:WPCleaner and there's a whole ton of pages that have wikilinks inside external links ( ie[www.abc.com [[ABC website]]]) and for this link issue it appears to be related to the template but I thought fixing what was inside the template may of fixed the wikilink-inside-external-link issue but obviously not

I'll head to the templates talkpage and flag this up over there, Thanks for kindly explaining the error it's much appreciated, Thanks, Warm Regards –Davey2010^Talk 20:44, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

You're most welcome, and thanks for trying to fix this. I'd love to be able to use that template again. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 21:41, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Papal primacy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Church of Jerusalem.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

sometimes we just don't have time...

When going through a long list of watched pages, finding links on dab pages with no mention in the target is an almost daily occurrence. I used to go in and fix every little thing, but it can be a slow and tedious process, especially on my tablet, and the onus is really on the person adding the entry. So I'm sorry but you got hit this time. Nothing personal. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 09:38, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

@Laterthanyouthink: hi! Nothing personal either, how could it be? :)

As a matter of principle, I prefer more info on less. Serves the user. So in a case like this, I'd either ignore it, or ping the guilty editor about sourcing their entry. I had put in some effort to figure out which of the 2 companies with the same name (one UK, one US) is sponsoring the award, but from my phone, not even tablet, and on the run. Sometimes I dare adding the source on the DAB page (major crime!), and our friend Konrad quickly comes and removes it all. When formal rules are higher valued than good info, I'm baffled, to say the least, and tend to leave, for the sake of my blood pressure. This as an explanation. Sorry if I sounded rough, not my intention, I'm constantly on the run. Cheers! Arminden (talk) 10:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Sure, no worries. I know, I do stuff on the run sometimes as well and often far from perfect style. I get your point and agree in general, but sometimes uncited dross turns up on DABs, and if Wikipedia is to be trusted by users it does need citing... so I do usually check if I get notifications. Anyhow, no hard feelings. 😊 Laterthanyouthink (talk) 11:09, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Israel Port Authority, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berth.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Help with Wiki for Rabbi Yehoshua Fass

Hello Arminden. I am the declared COI editor for Nefesh B'Nefesh. I am hoping that your editing on Israel and Jewish-related content on Wikipedia will also interest you in the article for Rabbi Yehoshua Fass, the founder of Nefesh B'Nefesh, I have in my draftspace. In 2021, a discussion about a previous draft resulted in a redirect. This new draft is expanded and includes the extensive coverage Rabbi Fass has earned over the years. Could you please review and consider publication in mainspace Wikipedia as an independent article? Thank you LA for NBN (talk) 11:54, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you very much for your confidence, but I lack the time to do any work on Wiki other than a small item here and there. I'm really sorry. Good luck! Arminden (talk) 19:03, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Libertas Schulze-Boysen

Hi @Arminden: I had to revert your edit on Marta Husemann. Nobody who is an actress use the word actress to describe their trade. They refer to themselves as actors and that has been standard for about a decade. On the Libertas Schulze-Boysen its a a fairly heavy copyedit and lot of it is knackered. Your changing section heading which are never done by a copyeditor, when somebody else is writing the article. Your putting your own sections headings in without reading the sources and they don't accurately follow it properly. You never change sections. In this sentence "The unit had been tracking Red Orchestra radio transmissions since June 1941 and found Wenzel's house in Brussels was found to contain a large number of coded messages." which is grammer mistake by me, is now "The unit had been tracking Red Orchestra radio transmissions since June 1941 and Wenzel's house in Brussels was found to contain a large number of coded messages" The first and last part of the sentences are not linked. It should be something like " radio transmissions since June 1941 and had located Wenzel's house in Brussels. When search it was found to ". Lastly, Stolpersteine's are not honours, they are memorial. I spoke to the guy involved in this directly about 6 years ago. I didn't get the impression at any time that they were honours. They are set as memorials in those sections all over wikipedia. And you left spelling mistakes. If you plan to copyedit article I write, please don't change the section name, you've not read the sources and be more careful please. I plan to revert it. You put "Marital and career problems" which is completely inaccurate, taking out the "Landesverrat" section which is critical to the whole life of that women. You have a section which is completely inaccurate and damaged the article. scope_creep^Talk 23:36, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

I see the thing about the Stolpersteines. I see what you mean. I've put everything else in that you did, except for the sections names and the moved content. That is back where it belongs. scope_creep^Talk 23:55, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, but I'm not interested - and hardly managing to hold back an outburst. See here if you wish. Bye, Arminden (talk) 19:15, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

October 2023

You have recently made edits related to the Arab–Israeli conflict. This is a standard message to inform you that the Arab–Israeli conflict is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Additionally editors must be logged-in have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert on the same page within 24 hours for pages within this topic. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics.

Hello. This is a message to let you know that you have used an edit summary that did not appear to be appropriate, civil, or otherwise constructive, and it may have been removed. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. AntiDionysius (talk) 20:17, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Arminden. Thank you. Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:37, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

October 2023

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for this appalling edit summary exhibiting a battleground mentality incompatible with collaborative editing on the page Re'im music festival massacre, you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 48 hours. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. 

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:41, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

---

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

How can someone express disgust to a point where it becomes physical? Consider it done. May the Hamas TERRORISTS and their criminal and/or moronic supporters all get what they deserve. Fuck Wikipedia if it fell so low. Bye. Arminden (talk) 21:49, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

That's a shame. Let me know if you feel different once the block expires. I understand it's an emotive subject but I can't allow you to sound off like that in edit summaries and on your talk page so I've revoked your ability to edit it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:54, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gadara, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tell.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Piped and soon-to-be piped see also links

Why are you adding Palestinian terrorism as a link to pages when that is a redirect and the page is Palestinian political violence, and why are you adding Death and eulogy of Ro'i Rothberg when you've agreed to its retitling? (as well as when it's, frankly, being only indirectly related, and a rather poor see also link for most of the pages involved) Iskandar323 (talk) 16:51, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi.

A.1. Logic: This is a case of cleacut, unbridled terrorism. I won't use euphemisms.

A.2. Technically, a redirect is a valid Wiki tool.

B.1. It's a relevant, topically connected article: see Dayan's warning of an ocean of hate against Jewish Israelis building up among Arab refugees inside the Strip, which is ready to strike the minute the Jews let their guard down.

B.2. Once the renaming has happened, one can either rely on the redirect, no problem, or rename the links one by one. I find it quite insignificant. I should have given an explanation (see B.1.) next to the link, true. Arminden (talk) 21:09, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi

Sorry I didn't reply to your request on my talk page before it was archived. I agree that those edits are problematic, especially considering the lack of edit summary and lack of involvement on the talk page, but not problematic on their own to merit a block. They have been informed that the Balkans is a contentious topic. If their long-term conduct is problematic, you could make a case at WP:AE by presenting diffs and briefly explaining the problem. Uninvolved admins will then evaluate the complaint. Unless they violate a bright-line rule, that's probably your best option. Our options at AE range from a warning to a complete topic ban from anything related to the Balkans/Eastern Europe and everything in between. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:23, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Sepulchre and Jewish expulsions

Good catch. Is the text on the original diff any help? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Church_of_the_Holy_Sepulchre&diff=prev&oldid=588107143 --Dweller (talk) Old fashioned is the new thing! 23:02, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Why here and not on that article's talk page? May I copy & move this over?

Of course, it's to the point & well sourced. Maybe too narrow (one very localised example), but w/o more research, that's what we have, and Wiki & decency rules oblige. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 00:34, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy to discuss in either place. I just thought you might not be actively watching there. --Dweller (talk) Old fashioned is the new thing! 11:19, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Very thoughtful and kind, I appreciate. I do mark articles I have active questions about. OK, so I'll move it. Thank you! Arminden (talk) 11:41, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Hostility

We’ve gone through this before, but you have since 7 October become increasingly belligerent and hostile to people who make edits you oppose, even when those edits are in accord with policy which you yourself admit when you make your personalized and hostile comments. I defended you at the AE that resulted in a block above, because I understand the emotions that can sometimes make good editors make bad statements. But you can’t just be an ass to people because you disagree with them, or you can but eventually somebody is going to get fed up enough to ask that you be made to stop. It won’t be me right now, but keep in mind that respect earned can be lost incredibly quickly, and if that is what you want then feel free to continue berating me for following WP policy. Take care, nableezy - 23:29, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Victim of female genital mutilation... Then smb wanting to "tear off her vagina..." No? Then no. But I be damned. Arminden (talk) 23:39, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

I addressed your objection to my edit on the talk page, I was here to ask you to draw back your hostility. nableezy - 23:41, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Arminden, you wrote "Sarsour fell into a well-known antisemitic "they're everywhere" rhetoric" about a living person in wikivoice. That's a ban-worthy violation of WP:BLP right there. If you feel too strongly about an issue to edit within the rules, you should take a break. Zero^talk 00:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

You're absolutely right. Full circle. I started with Danny Seaman or whatever his name was, and ended now with the Sarsour character. They deserve each other. The "they're everywhere" thing hit a spot. If the rules of the game really are as you say they are, then the game ain't worth the hassle. Thanks. Arminden (talk) 01:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm afraid, Zero0000, that this is still an issue. Arminden made an edit on Godwin's law with adding Woody Allen without explaining why it's even relevant (diff), like I'm supposed to know when the onus is on them. Not even a valid explanation. I would have let this go but it's a definite WP:BLP violation when warned previously. – The Grid (talk) 17:43, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Yearly reminder: You have recently made edits related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them. This is a standard message to inform you that gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 02:34, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Western Wall

Western Wall has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:14, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Zionist

I have been tracking your edits. You reek of Zionism. I can smell it virtually. This is the reason why I tell students that Wikipedia is not a reliable source. It is full of one-sided perspectives and promoted by extremists such as yourself who want to establish a New World Order under Zionism ideals. SaucyLasagne (talk) 10:51, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Love letter from SaucyLasagne

Hey, I got one too with the same wording as yours. Does that mean you have been cheating on me? Zero^talk 11:43, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Zero0000 It seems that we both have a jealous rival from England: Harry removed the love letter from my (!) talk-page, just like that! I'll put it back in, at my age it's quite flattering to get the attention.

So you're a Zionist too, and a smelly one at that? That's what history's dumpsters-cum-shower facilities are for. And they do have a glorious tradition, water or no water.

But we both love lasagna, so who are your seconds? I'll ask Smotrich and Ben Gvir. You can't disappoint a lady. Arminden (talk) 14:37, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

My hunch is that our paramour is German. That's where lasagna becomes die Lasagne, also in the singular. A venerable culture with a long tradition in smelling out, well, Zionists or whatever else comes to mind. It seemed as if that olfactory trend had been extirpated, my German experience at least is smell-free, but one should never say never, stench has its ways. Harry was nice and active and nailed up the door of that particular oven. Arminden (talk) 14:54, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Matisyahu Salomon

On 8 January 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Matisyahu Salomon, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 18:46, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, no, and that particular rabbi didn't interest me much either, I just happened upon the article. For me it's much, much better to stay out of topical issues. Arminden (talk) 22:14, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Category:Early photographers in Palestine has been nominated for merging

Category:Early photographers in Palestine has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 06:18, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Horon (disambiguation)

Could you nominate Horon (disambiguation) for deletion under WP:G7? Aintabli's move of Horon to Horon (dance) was reverted, causing Horon (disambiguation) to become an invalid DAB page per WP:ONEOTHER. Relevant information is located at User talk:Aintabli. Or would G7 not work because the page history lists Aintabli as the page creator? AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 05:11, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

AllTheUsernamesAreInUse, thanks. I introduced the move of Horon to Horon dance, with a reasonable explanation; he just added the parantheses. The reversal is idiotic, so let others deal with the follow-up, I won't cooperate. Arminden (talk) 09:49, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

The term has more than one, more than two, likely more than three meanings (Horon watches being one). I have created the DAB out of necessity, not for formal or private reasons: I went looking for something and was sent to the dance page, which didn't interest me. Now I've added an item, so I hope the topic of deletion has been put to bed.

Maybe you're interested in wasting a moment of thought on the revert done by the fellow editor with the X... user name. Have you, as an English native speaker, ever heard about the Horon dance? This goes to: is this meaning so prominent in English as to supersede other meanings on Wiki? Or is it just X...'s misled local patriotism, which harms the enWiki user? If you have an opinion, please offer it on the Horon dance talk-page.

Thanks! Arminden (talk) 11:01, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the topic of deletion has been put to bed. No, I had not heard of the horon dance. Are you referring to NmWT or Amakuru? I believe it was Amakuru that undid the move. Personally I don't see a primary topic at a glance, but I don't yet have a strong opinion on the subject. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 21:45, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

@AllTheUsernamesAreInUse: Thanks. Sorry, not X..., but NmWTfs85lXusaybq. I'll be excused for not fully remembering it :)

He considers the dance to be the primary topic, period, which almost led to the removal of the DAB page. Without explanation, just because. Not an editing style I like or accept. In Canaanite religion Horon was an important deity, places named after him made it into the Bible, not the least of books, no matter how you think about it. The Ugarit tablets too are quite famous in the right circles, and they mention him as well. All in all, not the most obvious secondary topic when competing with a dance that's not Zorba's. Arminden (talk) 22:01, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

But the page history lists Amakuru as the one who reverted the move? AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 22:05, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

To editor AllTheUsernamesAreInUse: What do you mean? On my phone it shows this edit with the edit summary:

"NmWTfs85lXusaybq moved page Horon (dance) to Horon without leaving a redirect: restoring to base name"

I'm not good with technical stuff, but is there any misunderstanding possible here? If it is, mea culpa. Arminden (talk) 13:15, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I think I know what happened now. I wrote this summary on a Google Doc:

Aintabli makes RMT in December requesting that Horon (dance) be moved to Horon, not knowing that Hauron was also referred to as Horon.

Horon (disambiguation) is marked with {{One other}} by NmWT and PRODed by AllTheUsernames, both shortly thereafter removed.

Aintabli then adds back the (dance) disambiguator to Horon.

Amakuru then moves Horon, now a disambiguation page, to Horon (disambiguation), citing “undiscussed change of primary topic”.

NmWT follows suit and moves Horon (dance) back to Horon.

All in all, I don't think anyone did anything wrong here, just some mild misunderstanding/unawareness. I may start a move discussion at Talk:Horon (disambiguation) or Talk:Horon per Aintabli's advice at WP:ANI, unless you want to do that. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 22:13, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Nice :))

AllTheUsernamesAreInUse, I believe you've missed just one step, the edit where I moved Horon to Horon dance (Aintabli then added the parantheses), because I was very much aware of the deity, and someone, not paying any attention to my argument, started the reversal process.

I hate forensics, they're a waste of time and I couldn't care less who's done what. I don't know anyone arpund here and it's very unlikely that I'll ever cross ways again with editors from the Turkey or dance fields. The ancient deity brought me here. Such is their power, not dead after all.

If you wouldn't mind, I'd very much appreciate if you could handle it. Thank you for your patience and willingness to help! Cheers, Arminden (talk) 23:29, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Of course I wouldn't mind. See you at the RM I guess? If you're interested in commenting on that. No guarantee on whether that'll be started tonight, but it should be soon. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 23:48, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Not sure what RM is. Re-Moving? :) Just ping me and I'll show up. Take care! Arminden (talk) 09:34, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Some unexpected stuff in real life and my terrible proclivity to procrastinate have caused me to neglect this responsibility for the past 2+ months. I will aim to start the move request by the end of this month, perhaps once I get a little less busy. Apologies for the delay. And it looks like NmWT won't be joining the discussion...they retired several months ago. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 21:18, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi AllTheUsernamesAreInUse. Thank you and don't worry, I've put aside this topic for now - and know perfectly well how this can happen. All the best, Arminden (talk) 04:29, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Mount Judi

Just removed a lot of Creationist nonsense from this and looked at the talk page. I see you said you didn't know how to use the Chrome extension. Sorry I didn't reply but that was a terrible year, doing chemo and at that point anticipating another surgery - liver - which removed a lot and left a tiny bit sadly. Anyway if you still want advice happy to give it. Article may still need work. I left a few citation needs. Doug Weller talk 13:44, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

​Doug, hi, I'm happy to hear from you! I hope doctors found the resources to fix what they missed at the op and that you're feeling better.

I had fully forgotten about the Chrome extension and didn't encounter it since, but if you feel like it, sure, knowledge is always welcome :)

Thanks and take care! Arminden (talk) 14:02, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Who Wrote That? is now a redirect to another article, but that article has direct links to add it to either Firefox or Chrome. Works with Vivaldi also. Really useful if you want to drill down into who added something to the article. Chemo is working, hopefully I'll be around at least another 18 months but there is no cure. 5k a day on my treadmill probably helps that and m Parkinson's. But I'll see my 82nd birthday and another Christmas at least! Doug Weller talk 14:29, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll try it out! Arminden (talk) 16:40, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Better make it a round number - 90? 100?

BBC World just brought a programme on a remedy against a certain brain tumour in kids. It worked perfectly in a specific case, now they're trying to expand its use. But I know the problem, what's better, to cling on to odd chances or face the probabilities? You seem to have found a good balance. So run, Doug, run! 5k? Me, I wish... Arminden (talk) 16:46, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

LOL!

Doug Weller talk 17:19, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

There's been a reply at Talk:Mount Judi to an old post of yours.Any chance you could at least put the article on your watchlist? And see WP:FTN#Mount Judi. This guy is really upset about having Creationist sources removed. Doug Weller talk 09:03, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I've responded to that now. From time to time I remove articles from my watchlist, as real life catches up with me. Arminden (talk) 14:58, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

On creating redirects

You are confusing '*' with '#', the appropriate form looks like the following: #REDIRECT Link 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:6C18:E506:2DA2:2A75 (talk) 14:55, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I know, it's just a slip of attention (annoying repetitive edits). Arminden (talk) 15:05, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

It happens, just thought I would drop a note so you knew. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:6C18:E506:2DA2:2A75 (talk) 15:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, both for fixing my mess and for pinging me. Have a great day!

PS: shame you don't adopt a user name, editing under an ID number keeps you largely out of reach. Just saying. Arminden (talk) 15:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I prefer not to give the impression that I will be around regularly when that is not actually the case, and now I have been editing this way for so long that making an account would feel weird. I like to work quietly in the background anyway. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:6C18:E506:2DA2:2A75 (talk) 15:24, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

History of Israel

Hi. Your changes in the article's lead are awesome, but Makeandtoss made the redaction a little bit worse at the end. Could you please change the beginning of last paragraph in the introduction for the following?:

The Israeli Declaration of Independence in May 1948 sparked a war between Israel and its neighboring Arab states.

I think it reads better like that, less repetitive and more academic. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.55.72.40 (talk) 13:31, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks.

A. I don't feel like I can sustain yet another BS edit war.

B. The war was declared & started by the Arab states. Clearly stating which side starts a war of invasion ALWAYS matters, sweeping it under the carpet it madness. One can of course qualify the facts - why they did it, why it might have been justified etc. Rewriting the basic facts is not justified. Arminden (talk) 14:11, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Was it you I had an exchange recently re. you taking a username? Anyway, it's not possible to have a proper dialogue like this, I can't ping you, I never know when you received a message or not, I can't add you to a discussion... I understand your reasons, but it's totally impracticle. Sorry. Arminden (talk) 14:30, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

It's fine, don't worry. Just another small correction in your edit: it's 'the', not 'de' (where it says 'while de Arabs rejected...) Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.55.72.40 (talk) 15:06, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm dead tired and it shows. Arminden (talk) 15:22, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm giving up. You can take over if you wish. Arminden (talk) 22:48, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Bolding

Hey, a quick note about this. MOS:NOTBOLD states not to use bold for emphasis; it's generally only used for specific purposes in the lead. Since Dome of the Prophet has an article, practice is merely to link that article. Cheers, R Prazeres (talk) 20:07, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Friendly note

Hello Arminden. This is purely a friendly note. I found myself concerned with some of your recent comments Talk:Ascalon.

You are not doing anyone a favor by taking discussions out of context. You have shown a tendency to take the discussion to irrelevant places. I've already commented on that before. When dealing with a topic, it is best to remain on topic. Letting the discussion spill over does not do any good neither to you, nor to any cause or rationale you are trying to promote or defend. WP:NOTFORUM and WP:CIVIL are the most effective ways to push for the truth.

I have already had my own issues in talkpages in the past, which almost got me impermanently banned. It doesn't matter that I thought I was right (and I still do). All that mattered is that placed myself in a trap. Those who oppose my position on certain matters took the oppertunity to unleash all the tricks in their hand to get me out of here. Luckily, I had made some undeniably positive contributions to the site, and there were a few who vouched for me.

I warmly advice you act in a manner that doesn't sabotage your own effort. Bolter21 (talk to me) 18:37, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Bolter21, and thank you for your friendly remarks. In a way, I almost hope someone will help me leave this space. It's been a useful notebook, an outlet for unused skills, a way to meet other opinions & even a small number of minds I truly respect, but for a long time now it has turned mainly into a refuge for bad times, which in the end is doing me more harm than good.

What I wrote is as obvious as daylight. This conflict and the activism it creates has the gift to poison even the best. Pretending it's not there is a type of masquerade and mindgame that ends up being harmful and disappointment in people one managed to respect is next. Eventually it ends up tainting one's character. So que séra, séra. All the best Arminden (talk) 20:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Vandalism

Aren't you too experienced to be vandalizing articles? Articles about the killing of children may not be the best locations for jokes. Levivich (talk) 23:16, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

​Your antennas didn't serve you too well this time brother, sorry to say. You didn't detect my feelings correctly. Nor did you address all the fairy tale elements in the infobox equally. Try once more. And keep up the good work! Arminden (talk) 23:23, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

July 2024

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for vandalism, disruptive editing, you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 1 week. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. 

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:23, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Dear ScottishFinnishRadish, don't tell me you didn't notice that Wiki has become a puking bag, specifically when dealing with The Conflict, aka Israel (may Zeus curse the name) / Palestine (State of), aka What Makes the World Go Round? So why being so pompous about it? Don't mind me, enjoy the vomit bag ride. Arminden (talk) 23:31, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

---

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

Kadaif

Hello. I see you were trying to redirect various terms related to Kadaif but seem to have abandoned the effort. Where is the substantive article that you were trying to target these terms to? --R'n'B (call me Russ) 17:50, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi ​Russ, I was hoping someone would contact me about it.

There is a proper article about kadaif = kadaif noodles, but some local patriots have redirected and appropriated the term for one of the many desserts based on kadaif noodles, namely knafeh. So we had

1. a "kadaif" article and
2. a redirect kadaif -> knafeh.

I tried to fix it and fell into a maze of redirects. Now the proper article has fully disappeared behind knafeh because of the redirects. Never seen such a thing. Makes me doubt to have seen it in the first place :) Horror movie.

Kadaif has articles in lots of languages, see here, but English stopped even showing up on the list. Can you help? Thank you! Arminden (talk) 19:52, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't seem to be able to find the "Kadaif" article anywhere; not even in deleted contributions. Was the title originally "Kadaif" or some other variation on the term? Do you know who originally wrote it? --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:54, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Like I said, it feels like a fata morgana. Didn't reed it through. I can't have imagined it... I wanted to wikilink to kadaif from an article, it went to knafeh, I knew it's wrong and searched around a bit, thought I found it, tried to fix the redirects and at some point it seemed to disappear... I's really weird. I'm not good at technical stuff, I was hoping you could tell me I didn't dream it and it's there hidden somewhere. Arminden (talk) 21:24, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, I'm sorry to say, I did spend some time looking for such an article and couldn't find anything, not even a deleted version. But another editor has fixed the circular redirects in the meantime. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 18:17, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

1R violation

This is a clear-cut 1R violation that I suggest you self-revert. M.Bitton (talk) 11:53, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Since you have no intention of self-reverting, I will ping ScottishFinnishRadish and see what they think of the 1R violation and this comment. M.Bitton (talk) 13:57, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement topic ban

The following topic ban now applies to you:

You are topic banned from the Arab/Israel conflict, broadly construed, for 90 days.

You have been sanctioned For incivility, violating 1RR, and disruptive editing

This topic ban is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Palestine-Israel articles#Final decision and, if applicable, the contentious topics procedure. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. Please read WP:TBAN to understand what a topic ban is. If you do not comply with this topic ban, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything above is unclear to you. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:04, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

• This edit violates the topic ban. I won't make a big deal out of it, but please don't do that again. M.Bitton (talk) 14:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ami Dror (2nd nomination)

@Arminden: What are you doing editing this archive. Editing an archive is dusruptive editing and is strictly illegal. If you edit any more archives, I start issuing warning against you. Don't do it. scope_creep^Talk 09:50, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

scope_creep, hi. Why so aggressive? What's next, punching & kicking in the teeth?

I see you noticed the talk-page discussion a few minutes later. So you know by now it was a honest misunderstanding, apart from not harming anyone in any way. You could have deleted this posting here, too. Have a relaxed day. Arminden (talk) 10:16, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

You been here almost 15 years and yet your altering an Afd archive like your newly arrived. That indicates sloppy practice and WP:CIR issues. I'm sure admin will be looking at it. scope_creep^Talk 10:21, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

15 or 150 - I'm staying out of all that, including Wikitalk. Life's too short for that. I have enough knowledge to gain & share, and encounters to enjoy on Wiki w/o going into any of that. And the project gains from it, unlike from bot-like bureaucracy. Sloppy is something else, pls check your dictionary. And keep your threats to yourself. I'm not into trolls, so dialogue closed. Chill. Arminden (talk) 10:31, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Note to self: parking here the deleted discussion.

Where is the material? Why was it deleted?

Latest comment: 26 minutes ago

Subscribe

The arbitration result reads "The result was keep‎", but there's no material on Ami Dror left on the page, just the arbitration squabbling. Where is it, who deleted it, why, and why was it left at that? Arminden (talk) 05:57, 26 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Arminden: Looks fine to me. Zerotalk 07:30, 26 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

​I see, thank you. I'll place a note on the project page. Arminden (talk) 09:38, 26 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

I arrived here by redirect from the project page, it was a bit obscure. Arminden (talk) 09:42, 26 October 2024 (UTC) Arminden (talk) 10:32, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

A link to the page which an AfD was about is always present near the top of the AfD page, though of course it will be a dead link if the page was deleted. The link Ami Dror is right there just inside the blue area. It's also a standard part of the title of the AfD page. That editor with the annoying signature and silly threats is correct that you aren't allowed to edit an AfD page after it's closed, but I don't know of a rule that the talk page can't be edited. Zero^talk 12:22, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

​Thanks Zero, I truly appreciate it. I hardly ever land on such a page. There is so much to be done about content, wasting one's energy on formal stuff is either a routine one needs to find peace & balance, like dusting the bookshelves or sharpening the pencils, or just useless. True, my focus isn't getting any better, but sloppy I'm not. Have a nice weekend, Arminden (talk) 13:09, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Wow, nice work!

What a fascinating topic Zodiac mosaics in ancient synagogues is. Thank you for writing it! ꧁Zanahary꧂ 06:29, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

​Thank you for the flowers, but Temerarius wrote much of it, and only after that did I get involved! And as of now, it only presents the data. The fun starts where the interpretations begin. Arminden (talk) 13:16, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 24

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rinatya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nahiyeh.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 24 November 2024 (UTC)