User talk:PinchasC/archive4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 Category:Orthodox rabbis 2 Feminist Partnership Minyan 3 Strashelyer 4 Orthodox Rabbinical Biography Collaboration of the Week 5 Deletionism facing (Judaism) articles 6 Orthodox rabbis categories for deletion 7 Block of User:Homeontherange 8 Eli Cohen article--help 9 Messianic Judaism protection 9.1 Update Request 10 Homeontherange 11 User:Dabljuh evading your block 12 Messianic Judaism lock 13 Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Dabljuh 14 3RR report 15 Would you be kind to review this 16 Request to mediate 17 Request to expand article 18 Prayer 19 Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism 20 vote rationale 21 apologies 22 RfA Thank you 23 BOT - Regarding your recent protection of P33nor: 24 Messianic Judaism Unprotection 25 Circumcision 26 Naming conventions for yeshivas 27 Admin abuse of permissions 28 Q re: RfAr with Homey 29 User:Betacommand 30 Beit Hamikdash article 31 Wikipedia:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism 32 Thanks 33 Ex-Homey 34 Tojo 35 Whats wrong with my edit? 36 semiprotection? 37 Article on terrorism 38 Medrash Shmuel yeshiva 39 Deuterium 40 Ethnic bioweapon 41 R' Yoshe Ber and Brisk 42 Articles for deletion/Jew Year's Eve 43 TfD nomination of Template:False accuser 44 Excellent 45 Kosher tax entry 46 reporting User:Haksve for 3rr vandalizm 47 Changes to RASHI article "discussion." 48 Kosher Tax 49 My RfA: Malber 50 Michael Laitman is back 51 gurary 52 3RR "warning" 53 Removing semi-protection 54 Account to be used 55 Regarding Chabad.org's link on Witchcraft 56 WP:EL 57 "personal attacks" 58 Messianic Judaism 59 Machnovka 60 TfD nomination of Template:False accuser 61 75.37.159.236 62 seeming bad link 63 Siddur Page 64 MedCom 65 Thanks 66 Checkuser clerk 67 Ascended_master 67.1 Reverting potentially libelous material 68 Let us begin the Mediation procedure on "Ascended_master" 69 My RfA 70 Editing and External Links 71 3RR on Messianic Judaism 72 Waiting for an intelligent answer 73 3RR violated? 74 Reverting and trolling of content on the entropy page because it contradicts evolution

Category:Orthodox rabbis

Hi: You may want to take a look at the latest developments at Category talk:Orthodox rabbis. All the best. IZAK 06:20, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Feminist Partnership Minyan

Hi: Please look at the article itself and its edits and the talk at Talk:Partnership Minyan. Thanks. IZAK 08:06, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Strashelyer

I saw the story in a book somewhere. I forget where. I'll try to look it up and get back to you. I heard from a nephew of the previous Bobover Rebbe that the TAY Rebbe urged his Chassidim to learn the Strashelyer's seforim. I heard the same story from R' Seligson in Crown Heights (though he didn't remember which Chassidim it was when he relayed the story. He kept on calling them "Carliner" Chassidim, and insisting that he had forgotten which Chassidim it really was. I made the connection later that he must have been referring to the TAY Chassidim.

That the TAY Rebbe considers himself a Chosid of R' Aharon is another matter entirely. Like I said, I read it in a book somewhere. I'll try to get back to you about it.--Meshulam 05:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

(In an aside: Why is it that when I tried to leave you a message, I got redirected to Eliezer's page?)--Meshulam 05:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

The Eliezer page should have redirected to this page. I had an username change when I decided to start using my real name. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 13:23, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

LOL - have you been nominating hassidic dynasties for AfD using Google as a gauge?? Cute. See ya. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 16:28, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Orthodox Rabbinical Biography Collaboration of the Week

Hi PinchasC, I've created an Orthodox Rabbinical Biography Collaboration of the Week. I'd love to see your comments, improvements, amendations and nominations, preferably all on the discussion or the actual page there. Many thanks, Nesher 17:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Deletionism facing (Judaism) articles

Hello Pinchas: I have just placed the following on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism. Shabbat Shalom, IZAK 09:21, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Orthodox rabbis categories for deletion

Hi Pinchas: Please see and vote at

1. Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 23#Category:Haredi rabbis
2. Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 23#Category:Religious Zionist Orthodox rabbis
3. Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 23#Category:Contemporary Orthodox rabbis
4. Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 24#Category:Modern Orthodox rabbis

Thank you and Shabbat Shalom! IZAK 12:30, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Block of User:Homeontherange

Just noticed this in the vandalism channel, I'm a bit unsure of the basis for your block, from the blocking policy "In all cases, blocks are preventative rather than punitive, and serve only to avoid damage to Wikipedia.", since that particular edit war seems to have been over more than 12 hours ago it appears that the block cannot be prevantative but punative. Maybe you know something I don't about that particular war, but I thought I'd flag it up to you. --pgk^(talk) 21:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

He is involved in edit wars in multiple related articles. Including one other one which he violated 3rr. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 21:42, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

In addition to what I wrote above, he is an admin who has been blocked for 3RR before, and gotten out of it by promising better behavior. He yet again violated 3RR on two articles, and he needs to learn that his actions have consequences. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 22:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Eli Cohen article--help

Hey Pinchas, You were the first person to comment on my talk page, so I figured that you would be able to help me. I have been keeping a close eye on the Eli Cohen article. Despite several cited primary sources, a few contributors are too eager to dismiss Eli Cohen’s amazing story. I left a message on the article’s discussion page, as well as on the most recent contributor’s, but there has been no response. Are you able to mediate the editing? Thanks, I really appreciate it --Stoopideggs2 03:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Messianic Judaism protection

Just curious, was there a request or was this a unilateral move? I was basically mid-edit (updating citations) as you did that, so it is somewhat frustrating. Oh well. Gam zu… and all. -- Avi 23:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I protected it due to the edit wars. For now post it to the talk page and when it is unprotected you will be able to add it. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 23:28, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Never mind, I'll keep it on watchlist and go back and try and properly source the article and its claims when it gets unprotected. Y'yasher Kochachah. -- Avi 23:34, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Update Request

PinchasC -- When do you plan to unlock this article? Things are currently stagnant it seems, with this article. And I (of course) like Inigmatus' version. Rivka 17:04, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

When the issues that caused the edit wars which got it locked are resolved. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 19:41, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

That may never happen. Ever. MJs are going to be on one side, and Jews will be on the other. Neither side wants to give in, both sides have their reasons, whether they be wiki or personal (religious beliefs, which I believe most are). If you take the lock off then perhaps we can start from there; I'd really prefer (as you know) to begin with Inigmatus' article and let people do what they wish from that point... Rivka 16:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Pinchas, this page has been protected for over two weeks. Rivka 13:48, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Homeontherange

I am not going to get drawn into a discussion of whether unrelated edits on the same page constitute a 3RR violation or not; that's never been my understanding of the way things work on Wikipedia. And neither am I going to get drawn into a discussion of whether I was right or wrong to unblock Homey; for one thing, he seems to still be blocked even though I've already unblocked him. I have taken other steps to attempt to resolve the matter through talk page discussion, and you can't even begin to imagine how little interest I have in getting drawn into a user dispute where both sides have equally legitimate claims that the other side has behaved inappropriately. Bearcat 23:54, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

User:Dabljuh evading your block

Please take a look at Special:Contributions/217.162.112.251, particularly the non-talk page edits. As near as I can tell, he is deliberately evading your block. Nandesuka 15:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't forget 217.162.112.233 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log). Reasoning is this. -Zero^Talk 18:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

It was a personal attack. And there are numerous others along with a general dememeanor demonstrated by this user with an intent to disrupt. These are good blocks. -Zero^Talk 05:15, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

PinchasC, please take a look at Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Dabljuh. What do you think? Nandesuka 11:39, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Messianic Judaism lock

Can you please remove the lock? We have a consensus in Talk:Messianic Judaism to use my User:Inigmatus/Messianic Judaism revision as the new article. inigmatus 22:19, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Messianic_Judaism#Page_Protection --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 22:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

If you are going to keep the current version locked then please re-insert the totally disputed tage as the current version is totally disputed. Lorem

Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Dabljuh

Hi. I've filed Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Dabljuh and listed you as one of the parties, since as filed it centers around his recent blocks and evasions of same. Regards, Nandesuka 16:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

3RR report

May I draw your attention to this 3RR report that seems to have been entirely neglected by admins. Pecher ^Talk 06:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Would you be kind to review this

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement#user:Zeq. Tnx, Zeq 19:28, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Request to mediate

I believe you violated WP:3RR, which states that reverting "means undoing the actions of another editor" when you recently blocked me for 3RR after I added a totallydisputed tag to Banu Qaynuqa when reverting to the version I preferred would have been a 3RR violation. I wish to resolve this dispute through mediation.

I will be asking for dispute resolution on the following questions:

1. Should a 3RR block occur after an editor chooses to insert a dispute tag instead of reverting, when reverting would violate 3RR, inserting the dispute tag returns the article to a previous version, and the dispute tag in question has never been removed except through reverts?
2. Would such a block be within the letter of WP:3RR which states that reverting "means undoing the actions of another editor"? Why or why not?
3. Would such a block be within the spirit of WP:3RR? Why or why not?

Will you agree to mediation? Please respond on my talk page. Publicola 17:53, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Request to expand article

Visited your page from the Talk:Messianic Judaism page, and wonder whether I might interest you in contributing to the Judaism section of one of my hobby horses: Fate of the unlearned. Thanks! The Editrix 08:33, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Prayer

A couple hours after you un-semiprotected the Prayer article, the anonymous user added his links again. -- Jeff3000 03:44, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

3 instances a day does not warrent semi-protection - q asked on talk page of article. KillerChihuahua^?!? 15:34, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism

Dear PinchasC! I have created Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism. Please put it on your watchlist, and please add relevant AfD's as you find them. Cheers. - CrazyRussian talk/email 21:54, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

vote rationale

I included you in my rationale because in my view you either lied outright or allowed your bias, whether against the Shefa Network or against User:RK, to lead you to make this very misleading statement, and that was in the nomination for deletion itself. A competent google search yields 89 hits, which is the number you cited, none of which point to the site you reference, and all of which are related to this particular group. I will grant that 89 google hits isn't a lot, but the google test is a tool when considering articles for deletion, it is not a "litmus test". That aside, the allegation above, is made because the google search you provide as basis for your assertion (here) yields 123 hits, not 89, indicating to me the definite probsibility that you did a competent google search first, which didn't support your outlook, so you did a really sloppy one and included the link for it as "proof" that you're "right". To me, such an approach, if that's what happened, is not only dishonest [a reflection on you as a person], but regardless of whether or not that's what happened, this is a very bad approach for someone nominating an article for deletion [a reflection on you as an editor and wikipedian]. Cheers, Tomer^talk 22:54, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

When I did a google search it was before links to this article was added in wikipedia and before google may have index this page, and at that time there was just 89 hits. The link to the hospital with that name is the 6th result. The primary reason for deletion was it not being notable the google results back up my claim. If it now has 123 or 111 that doesn't really make it more notable. As always it is good to Assume good faith. If this is the sole basis for your vote, I urge you to reconsider. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 23:03, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

You'll notice that the link I provided specifically excluded wikipedia or any sites using wikipedia content. As far as google goes, I fundamentally disagree with the assertion that google is the arbiter of notability. [I also probably fundamentally disagree with the Shefa Network :-p] As I said, the google test can be a useful tool, but not only is it incapable of establishing notability, it certainly should not be used as "the last word". That said, a tighter google search to exclude the Shefa Healthcare network brings the number down to 88, so the claim that "many of the links [are] for a different organization" remains patently false. As for the admonition to reconsider my vote on this basis, I don't know how I can. I still disagree with the stated basis for the nomination. The admonition to AGF is somewhat gratuitous, although it's possible my consideration of your motivations has been colored negatively by some of the active campaigners on the AfD...a sad example of "you're judged by the company you keep". I'll try harder to avoid such unfortunate associations in the future. Cheers, Tomer^talk 23:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

apologies

I noticed that you were trying to mark EI C (talk • contribs) as an impostor of El C. However, because the real El C has edited that user page, I mistook the impostor as the real El C! I mistook your edit as vandalism and reverted it. I'm sorry about that. Note that I've deleted my edits as they might be misleading, lol. --Ixfd64 05:19, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

RfA Thank you

BOT - Regarding your recent protection of P33nor:

You recently protected[1] this page but did not give a protection summary. If this is an actual (not deleted) article, talk, or project page, make sure that it is listed on WP:PP. VoABot will automatically list such protected pages only if there is a summary. Do not remove this notice until a day or so, otherwise it may get reposted. Thanks. VoABot 00:01, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Messianic Judaism Unprotection

How long do you plan to keep this page protected? Why can you not just let the people have their page? Rivka 14:34, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Circumcision

Can you point me to where a page protection was requested? Edit warring seems to be limited to user:Nokilli, who has a known POV stance, and perhaps this new anonymous editor, if he be new. Is this a unilateral decision on your part? Or was there a specific request? Thank you. -- Avi 02:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I should also add that the issues with user:DanBlackham and user:MikaM were worked out reasonably on talk. I think that semi-protection should be sufficient for now. Do you disagree? -- Avi 02:13, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

As someone that has not edited this article in a long time, it appears like there has been alot of edit warring on this page that has been going on for a while. If I am incorrect in my observations or if these issues have already been resolved feel free to unprotect. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 02:34, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I think semi-protection would be fine. -- Avi 02:35, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Naming conventions for yeshivas

Hi Pinchas: An important discussion is taking place at Talk:Telshe yeshiva that concerns issues relating to naming conventions for yeshivas. Your comments and observations at Talk:Telshe yeshiva would be very helpful. Perhaps it should become part of a broader discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism#Naming conventions for yeshivas. Best wishes, IZAK 06:10, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Admin abuse of permissions

Since you are investigating administrators who misuse their permissions to protect articles where they or their friends are involved in content disputes perhaps you'd want to look into this? [2]]. Homey 21:54, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Q re: RfAr with Homey

Pinny, do you have any idea where I might find this page? Tomer^talk 19:57, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Tomer, I've e-mailed it to you as it involves Homey's previous user name. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 20:01, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Slim. I've reviewed it and I have to say, I'm not happy with what I'm seeing. Depending on where the current RfAr goes, it may be necessary to dredge up some old dirty laundry, because my review indicates a definite pattern that should have been definite cause for grave concern during his RfA already--which indicates to me that there is little possibility that a change in attitude [nor a change in action as a result of a change in attitude] will be forthcoming without rather severe sanction. It's unfortunate, but this isn't the first time a generally good editor made a dismal admin. Tomer^talk 20:25, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Betacommand

thanks for reverting my userpage Betacommand 17:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Beit Hamikdash article

Hi Pinchas: Please read the attached request I received . Thank you. IZAK 08:08, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Need administrator help in Temple in Jerusalem

Hi Izak,

A user by the name of Biblical1 has completely rewritten the Temple in Jerusalem article multiple times, presenting some rather speculatve views of a few contemporary thinkers as objective fact and scholarly consensus. At this point, would it be possible for you or some other administrator to freeze the page and guide a discussion on the Talk page? Thanks, --Shirahadasha 04:46, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Shirahadasha: Thanks for contacting me. I am not an admin, but I will bring your message to the attention of others who may be able to help you. It is also very ironic and sad that on the eve of Tisha B'Av that this needs to be dealt with. Sincerely, IZAK 07:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism

Hi Pinchas: Thought you would be interested in the latest adventure that has started at Wikipedia:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism (perhaps you may want to join) and the discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism. Shabbat Shalom. IZAK 12:42, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks. I don't know why this Oliver character likes me so much, but thanks for dealing with the situation. --Meshulam 18:21, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Ex-Homey

I have unblocked him to participate in the arbitration case. I will ask him to limit his editing to that page and will use checkuser to police that restriction. He was never community banned anyway. The ban was derivative from the ban on WordBomb. Fred Bauder 15:06, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Tojo

Thanks for your help with today's Tojofest. JFW | T@lk 15:44, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Whats wrong with my edit?

What was wrong with my edit on the Israel page? I added a factual event which took place which has been ignored in the specific article. Its been detailed elsewhere, yet on this page it is not allowed on?! Why is this, are people supposed to believe it didn't happen? It's a FACTUAL event. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xad (talk • contribs).

I did not say that there is something wrong with your edit, I simply reminded you of the three revert rule which is for factual and valid edits as well. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 01:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

semiprotection?

One would hope that one's friendly intentions weren't misconstrued. --Kooky (talk) 23:02, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

No, thank you for your change, I had semi protected it which should not affect you or any other user that has been around for more than a few days. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 00:25, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Article on terrorism

You may find the article Terrorists of Pakistani origin interesting. It may be deleted soon in perhaps a few hours.

If you have any views on having such articles on Wikipedia, please do share them at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Terrorists_of_Pakistani_origin

--Robcotton 01:09, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Medrash Shmuel yeshiva

Is very famous and definitely deserves an article. Why prod it? I am removing the template. Discuss on its talk page. --Daniel575 | (talk) 19:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Medrash+Shmuel+yeshiva%22&hl=en&lr=&filter=0 --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 19:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Deuterium

You and Bish both support blocking Deuterium and Netscot seems to be under the impression that my lack of desire is preventing that from occuring. Let me make it clear that if you think Deuterium should be blocked, I will not object. JoshuaZ 02:37, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Ethnic bioweapon

Hello. Why did you remove the following section from Ethnic bioweapon?

In November 1998, the Sunday Times reported that Israel was attempting to build an "ethno-bomb" containing a biological agent that could specifically target genetic traits present amongst Arab populations.^[1] Wired also reported the story^{[2] [3]}, as did Foreign Report ^[4]. Expert reaction to the reports was skeptical towards the scientific plausibility of such a biological agent. ^[5] The New York Post, describing the claims as "blood libel", reported that the likely source for the story was a work of science fiction by Israeli academic Doron Stanitsky. Stanitsky had sent his completely fictional work about such a weapon to Israeli newspapers two years before. The article also noted the views of genetic researchers who claimed the idea as "wholly fantastical".^[6]

1. ^ "Israel planning 'ethnic' bomb as Saddam caves in", The Sunday Times (UK), 1998-11-15. Retrieved on 2006-07-11.
2. ^ "Israel's Ethnic Weapon?", Wired, 1998-11-16.
3. ^ James Ridgeway. "Ethnic Warfare", The Village Voice, February 2, 1999.
4. ^ "UPI report".
5. ^ "Debunking the "ethno-bomb"", Salon.com, 1998-12-02. Retrieved on 2006-07-11.
6. ^ "Now Playing: A Blood Libel For The 21st Century", New York Post, 1998-11-22. Retrieved on 2006-07-12.

It seems very well cited and appropriate to me. Thanks, Deuterium 01:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

WP is an encyclopedia, and not a soapbox for propaganda or conspiracy theories. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 01:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

 : How does that relate to a story reported by The Sunday Times, Wired, The Village Voice, Jane's Foreign Report? Deuterium 01:04, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

R' Yoshe Ber and Brisk

Greetings PinchasC,

I've heard you're a trusted Wikipedian and a fair editor, perhaps you'd like to weigh in on this one. Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:66.93.254.200

I firmly believe tha NPOV behooves us to include R' Joseph Dov Soloveitchik among the Briskers; others feel davka otherwise. (It is possible to work on an MPOV, before listing R' Yoshe Ber saying "some don't include him here", but I haven't seen anyone try that yet.) Your opinion please? (Just respond here, and I'll check up on it.) Thank you very much and Gut Voch, TLMD13 21:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC)TLMD13

Articles for deletion/Jew Year's Eve

Hi Pinchas: Take a look at this please: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jew Year's Eve. Be well. IZAK 17:22, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:False accuser

Template:False accuser has been nominated for deletion. This template was created by a user to counter false allegations of sockpuppetry. I hope you feel this template deserves your support. Please comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Mallimak 20:18, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Excellent

I strongly support your recent block of a discreet spammer, good work.--Andeh 12:12, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Kosher tax entry

Please explain why you consistantly revert my edits to the inaccurate "kosher tax" entry.

Thank you.

There is already an article there, work with the existing article instead of adding a new one on top. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 00:13, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

The existing article is inaccurate and misleading. How would you propose one should work with it?

Discuss on the talk page hoe it is misleading. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 00:19, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

For the reasons cited in my edit. The 30 year old figure regarding "6.5 millionths" of a cent per item is unsubstantiated. There are no references in the article.

See the talk page of the article where this has been discussed. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 02:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

reporting User:Haksve for 3rr vandalizm

Hi I would like to report User:Haksve for removing content 4 times in the same article within few hours. I have even reverted him twice three times on the Nynorsk wikipedia aswell but Im no mod here, and dont know how to report him for breaking 3rr either. He seems not willing to stop. Could you take a look at it please? --AndersL 00:38, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Please report it on WP:AN/3RR. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 02:36, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Done. Thanks --AndersL 02:39, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Changes to RASHI article "discussion."

Apparently, the RASHI article was vandalized by making various outrageously defamatory statements that were reproduced in the "discussion" page. These insults to one of the giants of Jewish scholarship were reproduced at the "discussion" site since August. I just removed them, and I hope that they are not returned.

Appreciate your support on keeping the insulting material off of the site.

--Lance6968 00:18, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Kosher Tax

I have made changes to the article "Kosher tax." I would appreciate your criticism, or suggestions, in respect thereof--Lance ^talk 20:07, 9 October 2006 (UTC).

My RfA: Malber

Thank you for your support in my recent nomination for adminship, even though it was unsuccessful. Thank you for your positive comments. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 15:22, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Michael Laitman is back

Hi Pinchas: Someone has repasted the Michael Laitman article after it was voted for deletion in July '06. I have put it in WP:PROD for deletion, but in fact, the one who has now reproduced it should have first taken it to Wikipedia:Deletion review which he did not. See the discussion at Talk:Michael Laitman. Thanks. IZAK 05:28, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

gurary

I explained my reason: he must be placed in some category, I dont care which. I am about to rename the category to Category:Lubavitchers, because "prominent" is a POV word and avoided in wikipedia's titles. `'mikka (t) 23:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

3RR "warning"

Where did I violate 3RR? I don't think I did, but if I did, please give me the page I 3RR'ed. TRWBW 04:54, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Removing semi-protection

Hi. I've removed the semi-protection on your talk page. I know that vandalism of talk pages can be a problem, but it's important that users be able to be contacted by newbies with questions and concerns about things they don't understand. This is especially important for administrators. I hope you understand - please feel free to contact me with any questions. Phil Sandifer 19:17, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Account to be used

My account is Praveen Dalal. Please keep me guiding as I am new to Wikipedia.

Thanks

Praveen Dalal 06:14, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Chabad.org's link on Witchcraft

Shalom, Pinchas,

While I don't necessarily think the Chabad.org link on Witchcraft is "spam," I do have to wonder if it's appropriate. Witchcraft is only mentioned in passing, and while the lecture does discuss the Hassidic view on witchcraft and occultism, that's only a small section of a much larger discussion. I'd like to replace the Chabad.org link with something more cogent if possible--would you have any suggestions? Thanks. Justin Eiler 20:03, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:EL

You recently changed one of the criteria at WP:EL to read "Links to search engine results of websites", adding the "of websites" part. I was going to clarify the clarification you made, but I'm actually not sure what that's supposed to mean. Help? — Saxifrage ✎ 22:16, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Actually, the primary noun in the original criterion is results, not search engine, so I don't think that's a danger. I don't know of anyone who'd accept the argument that because a site has a search engine, it shouldn't be linked on that basis. As I understand it, the criterion prohibits linking to the results page of a search engine function like Yahoo or Google's. I'm going to change it back. — Saxifrage ✎ 22:25, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

"personal attacks"

Identifying a psychological bias is not a personal attack. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Johnny Dangerously (talk • contribs).

Messianic Judaism

I have submitted a dispute for Messianic Judaism case both at: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-06-13 Messianic Judaism and Requests_for_mediation#Messianic_Judaism—The preceding unsigned comment was added by CowboyWisdom (talk • contribs) 11:31, June 13, 2006 (UTC)

Machnovka

Hi,

I am a historian of Chassidus, but have little time to edit or write for Wiipedia. However, I started an entry for Machnovka because in another article, Belz, I think there was some interestin the yichus of their admor. If you or anyone you know would like to pick up a format it, edit it and/or add to it I would be apprecaitive. I don't know enough about all the codes and signing it right, etc. I won't have time to learn anytime soon, but some of the material in the article is very hard to come by. Thanks. Hatzlocha rabba. Danielybrenner

TfD nomination of Template:False accuser

75.37.159.236

Your warning should be reserved for those who revert my edit. I made it neutral language and removed assertions about God's relationship with humanity. The Bible *is* MYTHOLOGY, not hostory. Only religious fanatics believe it to be factual. Don't issue threats to me. I just need to power cycle my modem and I get a new IP address. Someone else will get affected by your ban. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.37.159.236 (talk • contribs).

seeming bad link

Your link [3] on [4] does not seem to work. Carrionluggage 01:49, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

It is working for me, the site just appears a bit slow now, It is normally quicker. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 01:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Siddur Page

Wikipedia encourages the dissemination of the latest information, in recent history the siddur is being used more and more on PDA's and online devices, while I do not work or own iDaven.com, my friend does, and I use it, your blocking that information and picking and choosing which links get listed such as Kehat Siddurim and Yemenite Siddurim Links etc, is not fair. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.148.52.254 (talk • contribs).

It is ok to add the information and link, but do not do it in the manner that you were doing it as in putting the links in middle of the article. Instead insert the link into the external links section of the page. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 19:13, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

MedCom

Seeing as no one else seems to have any objections to your being promoted to MedCom, and in our lack of a current chair, I am going to promote you to the Mediation Committee if you are are still interested. If you are not, that is perfectly fine, and I wish you the best.

If so, then it is my pleasure to announce that after great consideration, you have been accepted as a member of the Mediation Committee. I encourage you to place the Mediation Committee page and Requests for Mediation on your watchlist, as well as the open tasks page, which will be updated as new cases are accepted. You may also (and are encouraged to) join the Committee's internal mailing list. If you have any questions about how the committee functions, please feel free to ask me or one of the other mediators. Congratulations on becoming a member! -^demon^{[yell at me]} 20:53, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, I am still interested. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 23:31, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my userpage. ~ Flameviper 17:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Checkuser clerk

Please check out my comments at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Clerks/Noticeboard. Thanks. Thatcher131 00:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Ascended_master

The Ascended_master page has been interfered with by 4 vocal individuals (Quendus, Vindheim, Hele 7, Richfife) that continue imposing links at the bottom of that page to smear articles (part of an "anti-cult" Bible fundamentalist campaign) that are directed against the leader of one of the religious organizations that believe in calling saints "Ascended Masters".

I understand that Wikipedia policy does not approve of attacks upon living religious leaders (in this case Elizabeth Clare Prophet) and, in any case, if such attack articles are to be tolerated as external links, then they should be on the page that specifically deals with that religious organization (see my further comments on the Discussion page for Ascended_master).

Allen Buresz 08:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Reverting potentially libelous material

From: Wikipedia: Three Revert Rule

Reverting potentially libelous material: "All users are encouraged to remove unsourced or poorly sourced blatantly defamatory, potentially libellous information about living persons, whether within a biography of a living person or elsewhere, including associated talk pages. As with vandalism, the repeated addition of such material is best dealt with by blocking and page protection, and repeated reversion should be used only as a last resort. Reverts made to enforce this provision are generally not considered contentious, because they are necessary."

>>> The repeated adding of blatantly defamatory, potentially libellous external web site links attacking any person or organization on a page describing the belief in Ascended Masters, a religious belief held by a number of organizations both in the past and present, is totally out of place - and a violation of the Wikipedia policy quoted above. This type of behavior interferes with the possibility of Wikipedia becoming an objective, neutral, and useful academic reference resource. At the very least, it should be obvious that under no circumstances should External links to defamatory personal attack web sites directed against any individual or church be on an encyclopedia article that is not about that individual or church organization. <<<

Please find a way to stop these attack links from being imposed upon this article. They are totally our of place:

Reverts made to enforce this provision are generally not considered contentious, because they are necessary.

When I make these reverts, I am reported to an administrator for "violating" the 3RR!

Allen Buresz 08:30, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Response at User_talk:Aburesz#Mediation. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 12:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I see the situation quite differently. User Aburesz is a major contributor in at least 7 articles with largely overlapping content. These articles present one particular system of beliefs from POV of a dedicated believer and are written in a specific style. "Ascended masters" is one of these articles (I got there from RfC). As can be seen from history of the article, input from other editors has changed the article towards being more informative and neutral. The problem is that Aburesz deletes the NPOV tag and all material critical towards the belief from the article on sight. After he got two 3RR blocks for this behaviour some IP-s tried to do the same but were quickly reverted by other editors. Very recently there have appeared 3 "new users" who keep doing exactly the same - removing the NPOV tag and all critical links again. I think that a belief should be described by different people, not only by followers of the belief. Also I think that the NPOV tag should remain there until sides of the dispute will achieve some consensus. Hele 7 23:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Let us begin the Mediation procedure on "Ascended_master"

Let us begin the Mediation procedure on "Ascended_master" as soon as possible.

Thank you. Allen Buresz 11:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Please clarify what is meant by the choice you posed of "public or private mediation". I would be agreeable to whatever will facilitate a resolution of this matter in a professional way with a consideration of academic standards of propriety. Allen Buresz

Private mediation would take place by email and public mediation would take place on a publicly viewable page on Wikipedia. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 01:25, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree to public mediation that would take place on a publicly viewable page on Wikipedia. Allen Buresz 01:29, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I have agreed to Mediation, and welcome this opportunity to restore a neutral, academic and informative atmosphere to the article page on the topic of "Ascended Masters" - which is NOT unique to any one person or religious organization. Aburesz 18:21, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Hello PinchasC. I wanted to thank you with flowers (well, flower) for taking the time to participate in my RfA, which was successful. I'm very grateful for your support. I assure you I'll continue to serve the project to the very best of my ability and strive to use the admin tools wisely. Please do let me know if I can be of assistance and especially if you spot me making an error in future. Many thanks once again. Yours, Rockpocket 06:26, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Editing and External Links

I have no intention of spamming, nor do my external links peddle anything. My web site: GodShew.Org has nothing for sale, and is free of advertising. It also has no copyright, since you cannot copyright God. Like Wikipedia, I provide (share) free spiritual knowedgle and wisdom about biblical topics. What is freely shared is from more actual Bible study than any living peers. My web pages are fully open to scrutiny, but not mutiny. I would that Wikipedia also be open to scrutiny, for some Wikipedia content on biblical words is highmindead, and borders on mass ignorance. Daniel Miles —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Godshew (talk • contribs).

This edit [5] to a disambiguation page, did not follow the terms of WP:EL. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 05:43, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

3RR on Messianic Judaism

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Naconkantari 05:20, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Waiting for an intelligent answer

Um, exactly WHAT about my comment was a personal attack? I expect that you will never explain ANYTHING to me, because you don't have an answer that makes sense. You are being irrational, barbaric, and inhumane by hiding behind your policies. This is not a flame, this is the truth. EXPLAIN YOURSELF BEFORE REVERTING MY EDITS, YOU ARE OBLIGATED TO DO THIS WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE AN ADMINISTRATOR. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zorkfan (talk • contribs).

[6] I quote "He is being a pig". --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 05:34, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

You know what? I"M SORRY! All right? That's probbably more apology than I will ever hear from you! NOW, explain yourself! WHY ARE YOU REVERTING MY EDITS, you have no right to treat me this way!!!! 12.65.114.23 15:26, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

3RR violated?

As an advocate for Zorkfan, I am curious to know if you considered yourself as violating 3RR in Messianic Judaism for the recent reverts of his changes. Although I disagree with the changes he proposed, I believe it would at least be proper if I asked you if you think you violated 3RR. inigmatus 16:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

It would take 4 edits to exceed the 3-revert rule see WP:3RR. So no he did not violate 3RR since there are only 3 reverts by PinchasC. The reverts Zorkfan listed in his report (as a blocked editor I might add) included one by another editor, Humus sapiens. --MPerel ^{( talk | contrib)} 16:32, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Reverting and trolling of content on the entropy page because it contradicts evolution

Hi, I like your page protect on the love article, could you help out on the entropy page as well as on the Talk:Entropy page. User:Jim62sch, for weeks now, if not months, has been reverting parts in the entropy article about how entropy is a measure of "disorder", because somehow it doesn't agree with his views on evolution. For example, yesterday he deleted a definition of entropy sourced by the encyclopedia Encarta, because he said it was "nonsense". Before he did this, I found another source to back up Encarta’s definition, and he reverted this? Today I put up a no-trolling warning on the Talk:Entropy page (because this type of stuff has been going on a long time), similar to how Talk:Evolution has one, but he reverted this? Can you help? I’m just trying to keep a nice science article clean and he is reverting, debating, and arguing that the page should be changed so that creationists can't use the entropy = disorder argument in their favor. Please help: --Sadi Carnot 21:00, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

You may want to file your request on Requests for page protection. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 21:14, 12 November 2006 (UTC)