User talk:Bbeehvh

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Bbeehvh, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for From Time Immemorial. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! brew crewer (yada, yada) 15:10, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From time immemorial

The article was the result of a long standing consensus on how its reception should be portrayed. If you wish to alter it, you should first make note of where you disagree in the talk page. Shoplifter (talk) 07:26, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

September 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. The project's content policies require that all articles be written from a neutral point of view, and not introduce bias or give undue weight to viewpoints. Please bear this in mind when making edits such as your recent edit to International law and the Arab–Israeli conflict. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:14, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I should like to apologise for saving time by using a ready made templated message, which was not as appropriate in this case as it might have been. "Introduce bias or give undue weight to viewpoints" is not really what I meant. The issue really is that you describe a particular view without attributing it to anyone, and without providing any sources to justify it. Is it true that "There is no dispute on the clear illegality of actions made by parties to the conflict other than Israel"? if it really is undisputed fact then it should be possible to find reliable sources indicating that it is. If, on the other hand, there is a dispute on that issue, then the article should not say that there isn't. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:29, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Contentious edits

When you make an edit that is reverted you should then go to the talk page and not simply re-revet. If you continue making such contentious edits, edits that approach the level of vandalism, I will be asking that administrative action be taken against this account. nableezy - 21:06, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

You seems to be new here. Starting of with the most difficult subjects may not be the wisest thing to do. Anyway, I have asked that someone would help you get acquainted. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Geopolitical ethnic and religious conflicts#User:Bbeehvh. -- Petri Krohn (talk)

Article plan

There is already Palestinian immigration (Israel), so we could broaden that and create some broad Non-Jewish immigration to Israel since 1800 and then go into the various periods. I suggest we plan this out on one of our userpages as a subpage User:Bbeehvh/immigration and then copy it over when we have a decent and sourced article going. It would also be great if we could find a reliable source for this list to show where people came from.

Useful articles to work with: Some of these will need better sourcing per WP:RS.

Metallurgist (talk) 18:29, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It notifies me when you add to my page. There is a way to reply here and tell me that you have done so, but I forget how. I literally just read about it. Anyway, we can do it on either page, but I proposed yours since it was your idea. We basically will just gather sources and write the article so we have a nice, well-sourced piece before we post the actual article.--Metallurgist (talk) 20:04, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bbeehvh/immigration

notification

This is what you put in order to notify someone that you responded to them on your own page. {{Talkback|username}}--Metallurgist (talk) 23:41, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Improper arguments

Regarding your recent comment in the debate about racism. It seems from the style and tone that you are expressing personal opinions instead of addressing the debated question: Do Wikipedia policies, such as WP:OR and WP:V, permit citing a source that says that "discrimination" exists, and interpreting it as meaning "racism"? Are they synonymous? I think it would be wise to rephrase and cite relevant policies, otherwise your opinion won't count. Just my two cents. And don't forget to always sign your posts. Marokwitz (talk) 16:15, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I changed what might have sounded the wrong way. Thanks. Bbeehvh

Keep up the Good Work

I've reverted the Deir Yassin thing like you've been doing. This entire category is such a complete work of fiction and vandalism by anti-semitic editors just plain making stuff up.

Correction: Vandalism by Anti-Semitic editors quoting stuff made up by this same Benevisti guy over and over and over again in each article. Aparently no other historian but Benevisti is considered "reliable".

Keep up the good fight against the vandals! 70.49.71.207 (talk) 09:35, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2013

Hello, I'm Excirial. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Eugen Herrigel, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 17:46, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]