'

Old talk archived at Archive 1, Archive 2, Archive 3, Archive 4, Archive 5

Centauri?

Hi there,

I've seen your and User:Calton's thread on that Centauri may well be a sockpuppet of Gene Poole; looking at their edit histories, I'd say that's probably true. (* = Centauri, # = Gene Poole). Any admin responses to this? Should this be on RFC? Radiant_* 10:31, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

* 10:29, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) User talk:Calton (→Alleged Double Voting)  (top)
# 08:17, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) Talk:2005 Britannica takeover of Wikimedia (schools ?)
* 07:54, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) Mothman (top)
* 07:34, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) User talk:Calton (alleged double voting)
# 06:04, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Saklan Valley School (→Saklan Valley School)
# 04:01, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Coppell High School (→Coppell High School)
# 03:42, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) Canopic jar (rewrite section on heart + brain to correct mistakes) (top)
# 03:34, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) Mummy (top)
* 03:29, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Joan B. Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies (→Joan B. Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies) (top)
* 03:24, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Ashley House (→Ashley House)
* 03:21, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/You Kicked My Dog (→You Kicked My Dog) 
# 03:16, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) User talk:Jayjg (advice)
# 03:04, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) m Talk:Egyptian pyramids (→Temporary removal) (top)
# 03:03, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) Talk:Egyptian pyramids
# ...
# 00:32, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) Talk:Seborga (→Not a neutral article) (top)
* 00:10, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) User talk:Gene Poole (→You're a sockpuppet!) (top)
# 00:05, Apr 1, 2005 (hist) (diff) User talk:Centauri (friday amusements) 
* 23:59, Mar 31, 2005 (hist) (diff) User talk:Gene Poole
* 22:54, Mar 31, 2005 (hist) (diff) User talk:Thryduulf (olchfa footbridge) (top)
* 22:51, Mar 31, 2005 (hist) (diff) User:GRider/Schoolwatch (→Listed on VfD) (top)
* 22:47, Mar 31, 2005 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Harlaw Academy (→Harlaw Academy)

Centauri issue

Gene_Poole claims that an IP check confirms his separate identity from Centauri. [1] Is that true? Radiant_* 13:54, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)

• You know, back in December, a sock puppet felt that Centauri was a Gene Poole sock puppet here. At first, I did not believe him, but then I starting developing suspicions here and here. Another point: Centauri has the same point of view as Gene Poole on Sealand. Both users have the exact point of view concerning deleting articles. I am very suspicious about the whole affair here at this point. - from User:Samboy

• Hi there! You said you were going to ask a developer about duplicate users (specifically, Centauri vs. Gene Poole). Would you please consider asking about some other people that claim to be new but behave like they've known the place for months? Specifically, the GRider impersonators (User:G Rider and , both blocked for vandalism and apparently old enemies of GRider), User:Klonimus (accused of being a sockpuppet of GRider, but judging by his behavior he likely isn't) and User:Sniffandgrowl (suspected VfD sockpuppet since he was created last week and has lots of VfD votes and little else). Yours, Radiant_* 09:31, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)
• While the developers are checking the accounts mentioned, would you mind asking them about User:School deletionist, User:Chriscf, and User:Radiant! as well? Cheers! --GRider\^talk 17:44, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Skver (Hasidic dynasty)

Sorry to call on you again, but tha above article has just appeared. I'm inclined to think that it's nonsense, but having had a girlfriend whose mother's family were Twerskys, I thought that I owed it to her to check. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:53, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I don't know who deleted it, but I still have it up on my screen, so it would be a doddle to recreate it. Should I? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 16:43, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

OK, I've undeleted it, and I'll contact SpaceFalcon2001 and ChanochGruenman. Thanks for helping. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:11, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Next about User:STP

Hi, you may want to see and add your comments to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#User:STP [2] Thanks. IZAK 09:33, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Green-eyed monster

Mine is pink, Jayjg. Think pink. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:18, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

thanks

Thank you Jay for the support on my recent admin nomination; your vote meant a lot to me. I've been appreciating your work here for a while now. Happy editing, Antandrus 21:37, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

New article: Women for Israel's Tomorrow

Please consider reading this new article I just created. --AladdinSE 11:56, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)

"China"/"PRC" vs. "mainland China" for page titles

Following the long discussion at regarding proper titling of Mainland China-related topics, polls for each single case has now been started here . Please come and join the discussion, and cast your vote. Thank you. — Instantnood 15:08, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)

24.91.96.179

You temp-blocked 24.91.96.179 a while back, but he's back with a vengeance. Can you help out? Matthewcieplak 23:59, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Just got errant message from you

You just posted "Please stop reverting the Israeli West Bank barrier article" to my page User:Feco/cats. I know why this behavior occurs (it's complicated) and I'm working to resolve it. However, however you intented to give that message did not get it. Can you give me the link to the UserTalk page you were trying to edit? I'll fix the problem that redirected you to my page, and check back to make sure your 3RR notice gets there. Feco 02:37, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

How did it happen: I use some templates to auto-generate messages to new users. It's very useful and saves a lot of time (see User:Feco/Templates if you're curious). For a while, I and a few other users were adding {{User:Feco/XXXX}} to pages as appopriate. This would load my template into their talk page on every page view. Cliking EDIT on their talk page would throw the editor back into my template. The problem is fixed by adding {{subst:User:Feco/XXXX}} to user pages. The subst function drops a static copy of my template into the edit window, rather than forcing a template-load each time the page is viewed. Feco

New Internationalist

New Internationalist was started by Oxfam, but now is independent. It is a liberal/progressive human righs magazine with a very good reputation for accuracy.--Cberlet 03:14, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Re: Anonymous editor at Nation of Islam and anti-Semitism

I'll keep an eye on it. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 03:15, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Roger that... --Viriditas | Talk 03:54, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I need to get into the office to dig up some research materials on NOI and white supremacists. It's a tricky area, but I think I have documentation. Might take a few days.--Cberlet 15:02, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Al-Aqsa Intifada

Has there been a slip up? Dont you think it should be called "Second Intifada", as the current name is as loaded as "occupied territories" is a loaded word. I think we should initiate a change in the article name. Is there a way to do this?

Thanks,

Guy Montag 07:50, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks and sorry

Hi Jayjg. Thanks for notifying me on various disputed issues and inviting me to join the discussions. However, as have you probably noticed, I usually don't take up on these invitations. There are various reasons for this, the main two being (1) that you are doing such a good job arguing your position, that I usually can hardly find anything useful to add; and (2) that I currently don't have the time (and passion) to get into long, heated discussions. I used to spend a lot of my time arguing on Wikipedia. I found it to be a huge drain on my time and energy, and it was usually not very rewarding. So I'm currently following Wikipedia more from a distance, only getting into argument over my personal pet peeves.

I wish you luck and success in all your efforts here on Wikipedia. I really think you're doing a great job. I wish I had the talent, time, and motivation to do the same. Unfortunately, this is not the case, at least at this time. -- uriber 18:01, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hasid-stub nominated for deletion.

Hi, I have nominated {{Hasid-stub}} (Template:Hasid-stub) for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion#Template:Hasid-stub [3] for reasoning and for your input. Thank you. IZAK 07:38, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Anti-defamation League

We oughta get an uninvolved third party to intervene here. I'm pretty sure we're right, but it's not as clearcut as most of the usual Nazi vandalism, and we're too much in the middle of it to be any kind of adminly arbiters. It's an issue on the edge (opinion pieces with lots of facts in them as sources? reportage from David Irving's website, probably factual but strongly biased?). --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 15:23, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Well, I thought about an RFC, but the instructions there suggest we try other methods of dispute resolution; I'm not sure we've exhausted those. (Sam Spade showing up isn't helpful; ever notice that he's the one sure to put a "welcome! be bold!" on every new Nazi's talk page?) --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:07, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Done. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:39, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Erm?

Why did you remove the link to recreational drug use from the drug abuse article? Guttlekraw 19:44, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Didn't mean to delete the link, but why do you think that linking to recreational drug use from a section of drug abuse entitled 'Advocation Of Recreational Drug Use' that says 'There are those who advocate strongly that the right to use drugs,' etc. is inapropriate? Guttlekraw 19:50, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, try that one! Guttlekraw 19:58, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sex education

I notice that you reverted this without explaining why. I'm guessing that you think that the education programs were aiming only to prevent what they considered 'abuse' of illegal drugs, rather than their use in any context? Could you explain why you preffer the term abuse to recreational use? The implication is that we are agreeing with their judgement that recreational use is automatically abusive. That seems like siding with one point of view to me. Guttlekraw 19:56, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Good guess; the programs did not suggest abstention from all drugs (e.g. alcohol), but responsible use. Jayjg (talk) 19:59, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure. The program refered to targetted 12-14 year olds, so I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it was encouraging abstention from all drugs, including tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana. The school based program staff probably feel that any recreational use of these drugs by 12-14 year olds is abuse. That's ok as a point of view, but it's not a fact. The fact is that they wanted to reduce or prevent all recreational use. Guttlekraw 20:08, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Recreational use by 12 year old was seen as abuse; it's hard to argue that it's not. Can heroin be "recreationally used" by 12 year olds? Jayjg ^(talk) 20:14, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The program specifically mentions alcohol and tobacco. I think that it is certainly possible to argue that a 14 year old can use tobacco and alcohol recreationally without it being abuse. Many countries outside the US allow use of alcohol by people under 14 in certain circumstances, for example, in the UK children over 5 may drink in restaurants with their parents or guardians. Whether it is 'abuse' is a matter of opinion. Guttlekraw 20:17, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure it can be argued that any use of tobacco by 12 year olds is not "abuse". Jayjg ^(talk) 20:19, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

That's ok, I don't agree, but what about the alcohol example? Guttlekraw 20:20, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Since use of tobacco by 12 years olds is abuse, the alcohol example doesn't really matter. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:46, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, I dispute that use of tobacco by 12 year olds is automatically abuse in every case (for example, see native american coming of age ceremonies). It is still an opinion. Even if we accept that tobacco is, whether alcohol is does matter, since they are still (if we accept that 14 year olds can use alcohol non-abusively) trying to prevent recreational drug use (as well as drug abuse). Guttlekraw 21:03, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

What do you think the position is of the people trying to prevent it, that they are trying to prevent "recreational drug use", or "drug abuse"? Jayjg ^(talk) 21:51, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, they are trying to prevent all use of these drugs. That includes recreational use of the drugs. They think any use of them (including recreational) is 'abuse'. I think that we should report that they think recreational use is automatically abuse, but not report it as fact. Guttlekraw 22:02, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It seems that as far as they're concerend, they're trying to prevent abuse. Presenting them as trying to prevent recreational use would not be an accurate summary of their intent. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:11, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, it is their point of view that any use = abuse. Others have a point of view that not all use = abuse. Therefore, the most neutral thing to say seems to be that they are trying to prevent use, which they believe to be abuse. Do you disagree with that? Are you really saying that they are not trying to prevent the recreational use of alcohol by 14 year olds? Guttlekraw 22:21, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Francis Ford Coppola

Hi - you reverted this, without mentioning why - I am presuming again that you feel that the drug use on the film site was 'abusive', but can we reference who thought this? Did Coppola himself say this? If not, who did? Otherwise I prefer the more neutral 'recreational drug use'. Abuse is definately a judgement - If we use it, I think we should say who thought it was abusive. Guttlekraw 20:03, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Schoolwatch

Sorry for leaving only 18 hours between the reverts. Would it be too much to leave it protected in the state it's in (i.e. without the bogus claims, and the "Vote now!")? For a start, GRider is blocked from editing, and when that expires he wouldn't be able to edit it anyway. Chris talk back 22:22, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

RE: Anonymous editor at Nation of Islam and anti-Semitism

I'm not really sure what you want from me in regards to this article. I have added in to my watchlist-- if you need more asistance please elaborate on my talk page. Thanks. -JCarriker 06:48, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

Robert Maxwell

Hi, you may want to look at some pathetic "editing" at Robert Maxwell. Thanks. IZAK 08:21, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

East Jerusalem dispute

We have a dispute in Talk:Israeli West Bank barrier with Mistiq and AladdinSE over the term East Jerusalem. I and Leifem are of the contention that East Jerusalem is a not a seperate city at and should not be called such, but has always historically been called Jerusalem, much like Berlin has never been called by its georgraphical areas unless under its brief stint under soviet control.

We need to settle the issue and you to arbitrate. I am aware that the apporpriate place to argue this is in East Jerusalem talk, but I would still value your opinion.

Guy Montag 20:47, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism listing

Did you check the vandal request at all? User is vandalising the project. --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 03:00, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the listing. —Charles P. ^(Mirv) 03:33, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Rachel Corrie

--Powergrid  03:47, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"As per the arbcom ruling, your edits can be reverted for any reason or no reason. Jayjg (talk) 03:50, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)"

Please explain what this means.--Powergrid 03:53, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"Feigning ignorance was a tactic you used with your other sockpuppets as well; it won't wash. Jayjg (talk) 03:56, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC) "

Please explain specifically what you are accusing me of and what you are threatening me with in more detail - and avoid making the personal attacks. --Powergrid 04:00, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"Think Pink was the best of the lot; use that persona again and you'll get much further. Jayjg (talk) 04:52, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC) "

If you are unable to express yourself clearly, please stop trying. I don't know what you are trying to say. Your edits reflect a pro-Israel bias. That much is clear. --Powergrid 04:57, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for rv my page

Hello, Here is Messhermit. Thanks for reverting my page from Vandalism. A lot ! Messhermit 04:34, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yahoo

The yahoo reference is because the company conciously is putting up references to its site. If one shall refer to all search engines it would be a long list. Why not Google as well. Its either all or none I say. See also the debate on main page about Yahoo. Axezz 21:20, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

THE main page of Wikipedia. I am just concerned with commercial messing with wikipedia. It has historically happened to almost every voluntarily webservers on the Internet. Just waiting till banners are flashing all over Wikipedia. I may be dystopical. Just put it back up if you'll like. Axezz 21:20, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

User pages

Hi! What reversions are you talking about?? Afaik, I haven't edited anyone else's user page in a long time, save to put a nice image on Anthere's. +sj + 00:59, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, that's very interesting. I wasn't editing wikipedia at 10am today when this edit was made. I'll see what I can find out... thanks for the heads-up. +sj + 01:10, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, I checked with a developer to see what IP made that edit, and it was indeed me. I *was* looking for a link to Wikipedia:2004_Encyclopedia_topics this morning, which I finally found via Danny's contribution-history... I must have followed a "rollback" link in the process. Thanks for catching it (following a rollback link apparently requires no confirmation and doesn't give you any indication of what has happened; it looks as though you just followed a normal link to the target page). Unfortunately, I didn't get your message until Danny noticed the change himself and reverted it; how embarrassing. +sj + 04:59, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

When an administrator views someone's contribution history, every "(top)" edit (that is, every edit which is the most recent edit to that page) has a "[rollback]" link next to it, which when clicked will automatically revert the latest changes made by you to that article. So, for instance, your current edit history starts off with the following when I view it:

• 16:29, 15 Apr 2005 (hist) (diff) Talk:Modern Orthodox Judaism (→Kashrut of gelatin is not a Conservative versus Orthodox issue - Original research is forbidden in Wikipedia articles; please do not try to include any.) (top) [rollback]
• 16:27, 15 Apr 2005 (hist) (diff) Talk:Modern Orthodox Judaism (→Improbable claims? - Provide sources for you claims.)

If someone slips while trying to follow the second link to Talk:Modern Orthodox Judaism, he may accidentally hit the "rollback" link instead... (at certain window widths, the links are right on top of one another) which will also take him to that talk page (except with your latest edits rolled back); unless he looks closely, he will not know that the wrong link was followed. I filed a bug report about this; hopefully this will be fixed soon and will prominently warn you that you have just rolled back recent edits (or even ask you to confirm that you wanted to do so). +sj +

Khazars

Khazars is up for nomination on Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates. Since you were involved in some discussions I thought you would be interested. Your vote and/or comments would be appreciated. Thanks! --Briangotts 16:00, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your help Jmw0000 08:51, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Powergrid

Isn't this a simple case of kicking him out? I mean he's been vandalizing everywhere - Hawaii, for heaven's sake! Where do I sign? --Leifern 11:07, 2005 Apr 16 (UTC)

Killian documents

Hi, you have nothing to do with this article, but since you've been helpful in some controversial areas, I wondered if you might offer me a suggestion on how to deal with the recent problem I'm having over there. Probably the thing to do is to take a day or two away from the article but my honest feeling is that my NPOV changes are being blocked inappropriately. I'm not really sure what to do with that. Kaisershatner 23:10, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hang on, maybe we've fixed it without you...Kaisershatner 23:19, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yemenite Jews and the Mizrahi dillema

I'm not sure that what is mentioned in your edit summary is correct, Jayjg. First, a Mizrahi can be considered a Sephardi. Second, I'm not sure that Yemenite are considered a seperate category (nor, again, that these categories are directly applicable to one another). It is my understanding that this is often used as a distinction intimating origin from a Western(ized)/non-Western(ized) localities, rather than the place of origin being West-East to one another (for e.g. Bulgaria viz Tunisia, etc.). Interestingly, based on a cursory search I did just now (I forgot about this article and your edit summary reminded me of it), genetically, there seems to be less in common between Yemenite Jews than all others (including Ethiopian Jews), but I am unable to trace the actual study at this time. El_C 04:52, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it worked. Found a good synopsis from an article written by a Univ. of Tel-Aviv scholar (and honourary lecturer at UCLA and Berkley), Sami Shalom Shitrit. I'll translate it (first link) as soon as my tea is ready. El_C 05:36, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

On closer read, my jubilation was a bit premature. He is, in fact, speaking of the "new Mizrachim," a concept increasingly viewed as cultural rather than ethnic:

What is "mizrachim" is something everyone knows [hah!] since the 1990s, at least ... but the question begs what is, or who are, the "new mizrahim." (from the first paragraph)

Then he goes on to tie it to culture, and esp. a political culture shared by Jews who originated from Middle Eastern countries, and includes Yeman, Iran, Morocco, and others — does that mean that Yeman was hitherto excluded from the (old) Mizrahi category, remains a pressing question. Sorry I couldn't be of more help. I'll see if I can revisit the topic soon. Incidentally, this was/is a matter of contention in .he's discussion, too. Perhaps I'll ask some of them to clarify and elaborate on their positions. Much of the .he article, incidentally, is based on studies by a sociologist, Yehuda Shenhav , who is a leading figure in the organization whose links above I cited. El_C 05:59, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Chmielnicki massacre

Mental note: Chmielnicki massacre = / = Chmielnicki uprising, and most certainly could be its own article rather than remain limited to a section within the former (which presently does not even exist). El_C 08:01, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Delete incorrectly titles Talk page

Hi Jay, please delete entirely this page --> ONLY, which I mistakenly created in the process of archiving the discussions at Talk:Israeli West Bank barrier. I subsequently successfuly created three CORRECT archive pages which are fine. Thanks. IZAK 08:15, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

oh boy,

Check this out: Hinduism and Judaism Cordially yours, Slrubenstein | Talk 18:33, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Killian documents

Listed on the talk page where? I stated on the talk page that the factual non controversial changes should go in, but the poor word choice changes and the censorship of information should not. How does that equal a factual dispute? Kaiser claimed there is a factual dispute with the article, you should give him time to state exactly what is wrong with the current version. If he/you don't that is borderline disrupting wikipedia to prove a point (adding a disputed tag when you aren't getting your version, you have to actually indicate what is disputed with the other version). I am careful about the 3RR, I only come close to it because I don't use sockpuppets. zen master T 02:27, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The version that you are reverting was arrived at by consensus. I am ok with factual additions going in but there is by no means consensus for the removal of information that you are trying to perform. And you don't appear to be trying to justify those changes logically (on the talk page or otherwise)... zen master T 02:49, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my English

And it seems like User:Islamist is on a mission. ←Humus sapiens←Talk 04:41, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

User:Islamist

• I think so too, since he is doing anything possible to make sure the Palestine flag is appearing on the Gallery of national flags, while saying that places like Palestine (eg. Scotland) should not be including. Judging by his user name, and his demeaner, his POV is that towards pro-Arab. Zscout370 11:26, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • One more thing, he has done a personal attack against you on his User page. He put your name under this list: "The following editors have displayed hostility, made biased edits and have reverted edits in an abusive way." Usually that means that you have been listed on there for editing not on a pro-Arab POV. Permission for a RfC on this person? Zscout370 11:34, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Persia

Thanks for attending to those links. Rich Farmbrough 08:36, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yet another Jewish template for deletion

Hi Jay, another stub has appeared concerning Sefer! and so I have gone to the efforts of proposing that it be deleted, see Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Sefer-stub [4] Please vote. Thank you. IZAK 10:17, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Nanjing massacre

Yes, that is a rather good example. Let's keep looking out for these. - Mustafaa 02:24, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Jesus

You should have blocked User:Slrubenstein as well. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 23:22, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)

Israel apologist?

Jayjg: Are you an Israel apologist? You seem to be involved in most of the articles concerning Israel's terroristic activities. Adraeus 00:34, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Naming ethnicity

I wonder why you have deleted my addition of Poles from Anti-Semitism [5] page? The last sentence, a quote, in that section says: "Wherever they found the szlachta, royal officials or Jews, they killed them all, sparing neither women nor children. They pillaged the estates of the Jews and nobles, burned churches and killed their priests, leaving nothing whole." IMHO, besides Jews this quote refers to Poles, why then not to name their ethnicity? --Ttyre 00:45, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

User: SERDUN just wants to thank User: Jayjg for posting my article via email.

Meforshim and rabbis

Hi, please see discussion at Talk:Meforshim, and see RK's recent edits about Rabbi at [6] thanks. IZAK 07:30, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thimerosal

Hey there Jayjg, would you mind taking a look at Thimerosal? I was drawn there from an RFC about it, but I'm running up against a POV editor who insists on deleting cited information that is at odds with his/her POV. The article is a mess right now and I hope to be able to help clean it up, and I would appreciate your feedback and help there. --MPerel ^{( talk | contrib)} 15:18, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

Terrorism

FWIW, I think IrishPunkTom is right in this case. The paragraph in question was extremely unbalanced and frankly read like a piece of pro-Israeli nonsense. He has put it into perspective by giving other examples that take the false dichotomy between Arab and Israeli terrorism away. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 15:40, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

(returning page to description of drug abuse, not whatever it was talking about now)

Could you take another look at this revert? Drug abuse is clearly a value judgement - the definition changes depending on who you are and your opinion. There is no one 'official' definition, even British and American medical associations disagree on what it is. The current version does not reflect this. Please let me know what you think, specifically why you think the topic of harm reduction is not relevant to a discussion of treatment for drug abuse. Guttlekraw 19:53, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Harm reduction is certainly relevant, but you refuse to cite sources. This has been explained to you many times. --Viriditas | Talk 00:29, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

For one thing, I didn't ask you. Secondly, citing sources is not strictly required unless something is controversial. Your continually removing every word I add stating that I didn't cite sources is harrassment and frankly vandalism. The harm reduction article has plenty of references, if you want more why don't you add them, since you agree it is relevant to the article. Do you want me to go through everything you write pulling out every statement that is not explicitly sourced? Of course not. That would be ridiculous. Oh, yes. I see. Guttlekraw 00:38, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Everything I have ever written is sourced, but the subject is you, not me. You have adamantly refused to cite sources for your controversial edits. You have been asked many times to read and understand Wikipedia:Cite sources, but you refuse to do so. If you had bothered to read it like I asked you, you would have discovered that your opinon is wrong: This applies even when the information is currently undisputed. --Viriditas | Talk 00:45, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Please take this irrelevant rant off this page. My question is to Jayjg, not you. Guttlekraw 18:06, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

List of National flags (regroups vs. enumerates)

I have been following the content dispute over at List of national flags, and of the diffrences between the two versions there is one thign I don't get. I am not sure how regroups is better than enumerates in the first paragraph. Actually I am not sure how regroups even makes sense in that location. Even though I am a native speaker of english I looked both words up to try and find some way that regroups would work and I came up blank. Enumerates does seem to work. But, grammar and such have never been my strongest point and since you committed the version with regroups each time I though I would ask. (Incidently I think I agree with you version of the rest of the article) Dalf | Talk 07:34, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Female "rabbis" in Orthodox Judaism?

Hi Jay, RK is now "building a case" for the beginnings of lady "rabbis" within Orthodox Judaism. See what's happeing at Rabbi and Talk:Rabbi, you may also want to contribute more information to this important article about rabbis in general. Thank you and have a Chag Kasher VeSameach! IZAK 08:09, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)