User talk:Jaakobou/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

→

Archive 14

---

Shnaim Ohazin

On 2 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Shnaim Ohazin, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 17:13, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

E-mail

Whatever it is, I'm not unblocking you, if that's the purpose of talking to me.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:00, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

No no. I had no such intentions (asking an unblock). Anyways, I replied to you. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 09:46, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

User page updates

Hi, I've copied your new barnstar to your user page. Not sure where you want the DYK to go; please advise. I know it bites to get blocked, but please treat this the way it's meant to work: as a break for reflection and a chance to gain better perspective, and to make adjustments. Meanwhile I'm looking forward to your next new article. Keep your chin up. Durova^Charge! 14:24, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'll be making the adjustments. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 05:32, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

You emailed me

What's up Jaakobou? I haven't been on Wikipedia for awhile. You wanted to talk to me? мirаgeinred سَراب ٭ (talk) 16:03, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

This is a bit complex to explain. Mail me back if you can. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 05:33, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for looking into it

You may find these pages to be useful as they document the actions of the previous sock puppets. [1] [2] [3]

The sock puppet insists on trying to mention my personal information as well, note the edit comment. [4] Most of these following edits are removed by Oversight [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] There are a few more examples as well if you need them? Fnagaton 19:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, it doesn't look good for Multiplexor, but I'm trying to get to the bottom of this rather than just promote a block which will result in more and more socks. I'll wait a bit to see if he gives a proper response on his user page. Regardless of his response, I'm fairly certain Dmcdevit will "fix" this as soon as he's back on though so I wouldn't stress over this if I were you.

Cheers, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 19:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I hope you find these other links helpful Wikipedia:Abuse reports/217.87.x.x and User:Fnagaton/SarenneSockPuppetReport. Unfortunately the modus operadni of this user is to switch to multiple new accounts when one becomes blocked, or to use Tor or hop around the now range blocked 217.87.x.x range of IPs.Fnagaton 20:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Fnagaton,

Mind my asking, but can you clarify on what you believe was the trigger for the initial personal attack and what you believe might be possible solutions for diffusing the situation. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 20:16, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

The user has been blocked multiple times over a long period and still keeps on inventing new accounts and ways to avoid the block. Looking at the first two edits [13] [14] that have "rvv" comments then the next two edits about reporting and "my friends" there is definite history with the sock so I wouldn't like to guess what goes on in some people's minds when they insist on being this disruptive to Wikipedia. Fnagaton 20:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Fnagaton,

Multiplexor has just stated "I don't intend to mention his realname."

Is this enough to diffuse the situation or was there anything more that must be resolved?

With respect, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 21:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for trying to sort this out Jaakobou, but given that another edit appeared with my personal information, which was removed by Oversight, the user has been blocked [15]. Fnagaton 07:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User:Jaakobou&diff=prev&oldid=212053710

Copied from [16]. (wikilink fixed) Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 07:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

	The Working Man's Barnstar
	Gratitude for the tireless efforts on the Wiki Page of CMKC. Especially knowing how busy you were, you were still able to help out; for the gracious efforts, I thought the "working man's barnstar" was the most suitable. Yonigs (talk) 15:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Media coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict (May 14, 2008)

Per this diff and this reversion of Media coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict:

Regarding the use of "abduct" versus "capture"... While I agree with you that "abduct" is the most accurate descriptor, I think "capture" is an accurate and more neutral descriptor. I would rather not drag Media coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict into a long and drawn out edit war over "abducted", "taken hostage", or "taken prisoner of war", when the accurate and neutral term "capture" can as easily suffice. Since Media coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict wikilinks to Gilad Shalit, I will leave it to the editors of that article to decide the appropriate wording. Also, because of the wikilink, the additional sources are superfluous -- thanks, though, for adding them.

Good day and good luck with your edits. ← Michael Safyan ^(talk) 20:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I can't say I agree completely with the "capture" terminology since the word "abduct" is used by high quality neutral sources -- I used 2: International Herald Tribune and CNN -- plus it was already accepted by Pedrito as NPOV and a proper descriptive. However, this issue is not really the topic of the article so I'll let this go for now so not to distract from the development of the newly re-written article - Good work btw. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 20:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

5/15 DYK

On 15 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article CMKC Group, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Bedford 22:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Offense

Offesive comment diff, and explanation. (added Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 07:15, 20 May 2008 (UTC))

If you would like me to remove the comment that offended you, I am happy to, on the condition that both of us remove that whole exchange, since without my actual words all our back-and-forth will lack context anyway. At this stage it's just between us, really, and the discussion has gone off the topic of changing the name of the category. Let me know what you think, LamaLoLeshLa (talk) 06:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll think about it a little bit (I have to go out now anyways) and get back to you.

Cordially, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 07:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, sure. You can either strike your text with the <s>Text</s> tags (result text) or remove it completely and also remove the comments starting with "(offtopic comment to LamaLoLeshLa)".

apologies for the delayed response. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 08:27, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Done. Glad we could resolve this with respect. LamaLoLeshLa (talk) 18:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

PEA

I see you labelled the change from 'critiques' to 'denunciations' PEA. I don't see it that way. I think critiques is pretty weak - you can use it with a plan people are critical of, or a film people don't like - but these human rights org.s denounced Operation Defensive Shield. I'm feeling like this is getting personal. Is it?LamaLoLeshLa (talk) 06:31, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I can't say what it is that may have triggered this, but I certainly sensed that there was an issue when you've decided to make a personally directed comment to a discussion of mine from last year.[17] I wasn't sure on how to respond or if I should respond at all to the content part of your question, due to the nature of the question. Content disputes occur, and you should avoid carrying personal disputes across articles.

By the way, I don't know what you refer to here (re: personally directed comments), please explain. Thanks, LamaLoLeshLa (talk) 18:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm referring to this policy: Wikipedia:CIV#Engaging_in_incivility, my concern was specifically the judgmental tone directed at me in person (see also WP:NPA), rather than a civil inquiry regarding the content issue which you were unclear about. Judgmental commentary directed at fellow editors detract from an ability to discuss your concerns in a calm manner (see also: Erosion_of_critical_thinking).

The golden rule, in my opinion, is "Comment on content, not on the contributor." (from the NPA)

With respect, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 19:18, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I assure you that there is nothing personal here, but I am a bit concerned regarding your recent misuse of sources, more specifically, the ElectronicIntifada.net edit[18] which I reverted.[19] If you have used this source on other locations, I request that you either find a WP:RS replacement or that you remove both the reference and the related materials.

If you want to continue this conversation, we can either go over it on the relevant article talk page or that you can e-mail me.

With respect, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 06:54, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually I have never used the Electronic Intifada as a source. I have been changing the ordering of many articles recently, so that they are more chronological and followable; I haven't added many of my own footnotes in the past few days of editing, so maybe you misconstrued my copy-pastes as new additions. Maybe in that case I copied from another article. But actually if I remember correctly, all I was trying to do in that case specifically was to add that it is referred to variously by different populations. I think you managed to keep my basic point in? And I was fine with that.

As an aside, I think Electronic Intifada varies- it depends on the author, but no, I don't tend to use it as a reliable source of historical data - it can however be valuable in terms of reflecting sentiments during a particular time... I wouldn't necessarily assume the worst if someone cites it, though I understand that it raises eyebrows. I have reservations about it as a source as well, depending on the article. LamaLoLeshLa (talk) 07:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I suggest you review WP:QS and also the attached diffs from my earlier comment. If you see this error being done by others, you should revert it. Let me know where you copy-pasted the Erekat text from,[20] it was a clear error that should be corrected. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 08:20, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Second Intifada

I just need you, to put a comment under where you accepted the proposal, to just write that you're aware that the decision will be binding. As the mediation has gone on for over two months, it really needs to press on, I need you to do this ASAP. Thanks. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 00:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Done,[21] Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 09:54, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikicookie

I am awarding you this WikiCookie for your constructive edits on Wikipedia--LAAFan 17:29, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Pallywood

I think the 3rd journalist mentioned (the Canadian one) is clearly not a conservative commentator, but I am not going to edit war over this. If you are fine with "conservative" - so be it. Canadian Monkey (talk) 16:30, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Mediation

Hi Jaakobou,

Thanks for your vote of confidence in the process in the RfM for Gilad Shalit. My role, as I see it is to do the following:

• Listen to all participants
• Help formulate an agenda
• Identify common interests
• Identify pertinent facts/policies/research that would assist participants in forming agreement
• Facilitate an agreement and action plan.

I suggest that we start with an opening statement from each of the participants on the RfM talk page. I've also suggested a few groundrules there. If at any time you wish to contact me privately via e-mail, please feel free to do so here. Best wishes. Sunray (talk) 21:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Again, my apologies for talking about you before contacting you. I only meant to introduce your name in a complimentary way, as I was struck by your objectivity in exploring something from a POV you clearly find objectionable. Cheers,John Z (talk) 06:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Mark Goffeney

On 30 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mark Goffeney, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 18:29, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Political party tagging

Just as a heads up, for some reason, if you just add the tag without a rating to a talk page, it shows up with a bunch of code underneath (e.g. Talk:Democratic Choice), so you might want to rate them as you go along. I would imagine any defunct party would rate as low importance, and any existing party as medium. пﮟოьεԻ 57 15:21, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Good point, I'll take it into consideration.

Thanks, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 15:23, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

King David Hotel bombing

Unrelated Original Research? Unrelated - in what way? Original Research - how do you know? Ah well, I suppose that'll teach me to give citations for everything. While I go off and try to rediscover what the source is, perhaps you'd like to wander over to the List of terrorist incidents article, where you can find confirmation that the King David Hotel bombing was the most lethal 'terrorist attack' until the 80s. -- ZScarpia (talk) 17:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't matter it if it's true, only that it is unrelated. Btw, the article's talk page is probably a better location for this discussion.

With respect, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 04:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me for replying here. Can you justify your assertion of unrelatedness? I think that truth does matter, though obviously the truth is often relative, not absolute, and what matters isn't so much what you say is the truth, but how you justify saying it is. With respect also, -- ZScarpia (talk) 11:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

There's no reason why we can't talk this through on the article's talk page. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 12:01, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Images

I saw your post on image work fron the Wiki help page and I might be able to help you out. Feel free to send me an e-mail about whatever you want me to do.
Cheers, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 15:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Thank you for offering to help.

On July 15th, I'll be hosting a big geography-related collaboration/competition. It'll be the biggest project I've ever attempted on Wikipedia (bigger than the WP:TOTD, the help system overhaul, or even the Main Page redesign). Its scope shall be all the countries of the world.

To make this event extra-special, it needs its own awards. It will have at least three.

Each award will have an image in it, and it is these I need help with.

The first award is almost done, and I've got others helping out with that. In case you are interested in what it looks like, here is the current version (all it needs is a passport added to it, and the shadow adjusted, and it will be done):

File:Blue Marble Puzzle Globe in stand.png

The second award will be a medal. I'd like it to be gold, with the words "Wikipedia World Developer" engraved into the medal and wrapped around the inside edge at the bottom of the medal, and with a world map (with latitude and longitude lines) engraved into the center of the medal. The medal needs to be hanging from a ribbon that goes around one's neck, and pivoted a little so you can see its right edge.

The closest thing to a medal of this type I could find is this:

The image needs to be created and shared in xcf format, so that layer information is retained, to allow others (like me) to work on various parts of it if need be.

I look forward to your reply.

The Transhumanist    23:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Award

		The Golden Wiki Award
		I hereby award you this Barnstar for helping Wikipedia:WikiProject Political parties. --Megapen (talk) 18:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Haim Farhi

Jaakobou. I think I've found a source that will resolve the riddle of the year of Farhi's murder (Thomas Phillip also gives 1820 by the way), and provide further details to giver a richer text. Itzhak Ben-Zvi, Eretz-Israel under Ottoman Rule, 2nd ed. Jerusalem (Heb)1966 pp.319-22,339-43. This is in Hebrew, and if you can consult it, I've no doubt we'll get further details on our man, to do him justice, and work the page up. Thanks in the meantime for the groundwork. I find him and his remarkable family very interesting, and had you not drafted the page, I would never have had my curiosity stirred. Regards Nishidani (talk) 11:28, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Can't find an online version of the book, and the closest target seemed, upon first inspection, to either be in Karmiel or Jerusalem. Don't believe I'll be making the trip anytime soon, sorry. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 12:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Btw, it seems that the book's name is Hebrew: "ארץ-ישראל ויישובה בימי השלטון העותמאני" which is a bit different than the English name you provided. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 12:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't you have interlibrary loans there? I know this is work, but in my home country, I can drop into any library anywhere and order a book located in any other library and have it within a week or two. Of course, this would be troublesome, but now that we have the article going, I should think that it's worth the effort to keep an eye out for sources like that, perhaps ask friends to look out for it or consult it and improve the article. I think in the long term with these articles, and the Farhi piece is long on background and short on details about the specifics of his life. It's a shame, that family, like so many in the area, was and still is, an amazing one, full of extraordinary people, and they deserve the best we can do for them.Nishidani (talk) 15:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: I think I found what you were looking for

Ah darn, I should've indicated that I need an image of the route itself; those are just images of a sign for the route on a different route. Thanks for trying, though! Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 16:59, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Be Bold

Thanks for welcome and article check. Thought about being bold for Disinfo, but didn't want to get into an edit war...someone calling themselves Disinformer made 12 recent edits, which smelled funny to me...Elizabeth BY (talk) 07:45, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

You can't know unless you try. He/She might be oblivious to WP:SOAP rules. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 07:48, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Busted

Three cheers for creativity and effort, but I guess you'll ultimately get banned for this stunt.

Cheers, pedrito - talk - 11.06.2008 06:36

Courtesy notice

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement#Pedrito's interest in Jaakobu -- Avi (talk) 12:31, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Your email

I received your email today. Please understand that for privacy reasons, I do not respond to Wikipedia emails. If you have a question, please post it publicly on my user talk page. Thanks. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 18:23, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Israeli Culture Pictures

What's up? I noticed you added a picture of Jewish Folk Dancing. The culture section speaks of "diverse culture." Don't you think we should post a picture that isn't a Jewish activity? Maybe a non-religious or Christian, Muslim, other activity would better represent the section on the "diverse culture" of Israel. Beam 23:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Heyo Beamathan,

I'm not sure we disagree here. The folk dance is an amalgamation of several cultures and it being performed by Jewish-Israelis is the only reason for the "Jewish-Israeli" in the title. I don't think there's a need to "show" the culture of minorities on the Israeli page unless there's a section dedicated to just that. To clarify, I'm not objecting some addition of a non-Jewish cultural image but I can't seem to have anything appropriate come to mind. Also, I would not want to see the folk dancing image or any of the other two replaced.

Let me know if you have interesting suggestions though, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 06:48, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Well maybe something from the ArabIsraeli minority would be good. I'll look around for a free image. Beam 12:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-06-17 Muhammad al-Durrah

Hello. I'm going to take over this MedCab case and try to work this stuff out. I posted in the talk page what I would like all participants to do to start. Hopefully this all works out well, I have zero intention of leaning towards any one side in this dispute, and I only care about getting it taken care of. Wizardman 18:52, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Apology

I just realized that I badly misread part of your presentation on the G.S. med case[22]. On re-reading, I can only think that I must have confused your comments in two different sections. My sincere apologies. I have suggested that we re-start and have asked P. for some specific comments in response to yours. If he is unwilling to comment, I will move to close the case. Sunray (talk) 19:02, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate the gesture. In general, my suggestion on how to resolve the problem (the way I see it) still stands. I'll keep following the page to see if Pedrito takes the time to reply to you. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 20:07, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

"Israel ranks high among Middle Eastern countries on the bases of human development"

Can you please take a look at this? It was changed from "highest" on the Israel page, but the explanation is wrong IMO and it was done quite unilaterally, as I mentioned on the Israel talk page.Lawabider (talk) 17:41, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

What was the reference for 'highest' and the given reasoning for taking it down a notch? Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 18:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Next steps

Pedrito has not yet responded to the message I left him on his talk page. I note that he has edited only once since then. However, you have participated in good faith and we cannot hold the case open much longer. Therefore, I propose the following course of action: 1) Allow Pedrito a few more days to respond. 2) If he does not comment further on the mediation page, I propose to suspend the mediation and make a brief summary of your arguments and his response, along with my questions to him on the G.S. talk page, requesting input from others. 3) Based on the outcome of that discussion, I will attempt to determine consensus on the matter. How does that strike you? Sunray (talk) 06:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll think about it for a bit and get back to you. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 07:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

September 11th again

Re this. I am concerned that having for so long held out against merging a page about one reaction to 9/11 (ie the celebrations) into a main "Reactions .." page, you are now actively trying to promote the merger of the main "Reactions .. " article into the "Aftermath .." article. For now I'll assume good faith (even if you are describing it as a "mediocre article", which is an irrelevant point anyway assuming you are referring to the current content). Are you arguing that, were this to happen, that the "Celebrations .." article would still exist? That is, that every reaction except the celebration be merged into the Aftermath article? That would be pretty odd. In any event, the Aftermath article is quite clearly about the longer term real-world consequences of 9/11, especially those internal to the US. The "Reactions .." page is covering very different subject matter. You can reply and explain a bit more here. --Nickhh (talk) 12:40, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Question: Are you following my contributions and promoting a "let's battle with Jaakobou" atmosphere again? Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 13:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC) clarify. 13:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

You've been doing a lot more following of me recently by the look of it, suddenly appearing on pages I was on and where you hadn't been for a while (al Durra etc). And yes, I looked in at the Reactions/Celebrations articles recently as I have been heavily involved in editing them. And I noticed the errors you have put into one of them, and put them right. This is good practice, even if you don't like it. And then I also noticed you trying to elicit support for some slightly odd merging, so I commented on that too. --Nickhh (talk) 13:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

So, to clarify on your statement, are you calling your style of harrassment "good practice" now? Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 13:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

No. I very clearly said putting errors right is good practice. How have I harrassed you anyway? --Nickhh (talk) 13:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

(a) I request that you do not revert back to stalking my contributions.

(b) I'm not interested in prolonging this argument.

Cheers, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 13:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Huh? Ffs - I have never "stalked" you, and you started this argument! Cheers indeed --Nickhh (talk) 13:30, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

You'd never editted either page before Jaakabou had. Smells like a duck to me. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 13:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

You've just made a bit of a fool of yourself I'm afraid. Check my talk page and both article history for just how involved I have been in the past, especially with the Reactions article. --Nickhh (talk) 14:02, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I've divided by zero and still come up with 0 edits to either article for you. Was that quacking I heard? Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 14:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

To be fair, the history of Imad Marie's sandbox version was not carried over into the article once it was created for real, so the full history may not be obvious there. But I have edited the Celebrations .. page quite a bit in the past, so I don't know how you missed that. HAnd having said all that, is turning up recently on one page where another editor you happen to have encountered before is also editing actually evidence of stalking anyway? By that definition, you stalked me here. Sorry for clogging up your talk page Jaakobou, but Kyaa came by to have a go at me as well, in slight ignorance of the facts, so I had to defend myself. --Nickhh (talk) 14:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

The plain fact is that you appeared out of nowhere, decided to edit tendentiously on a IP article and are now trying to backpeddle frantically, Howard. Good show tho. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 14:18, 2 July 2008 (UTC)