User talk:Schrodingers Mongoose

The Standard Greeting!

Hello there!

Welcome to Wikipedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Also: you can play and experiment all you want in the Sandbox. If would like to ask questions about anything at Wikipedia, please feel free to message me here.

Here are a few other links you might find helpful:

We're so glad you're here! Welcome, and Happy editing! --DanielCD 01:47, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Israel Page

Hi, I just wanted to stop by and thank you for being one of the only level headed people on the israel page. Spending most of my time in the office means I get most of my news from the internet, and I know that when I check up on news in Israel, I can look forward to seeing vitriolic hate filled comments on blogs, not to mention blatantly bad journalism on the part of even well respected news organizations. It's nice to see someone contributing possitive discourse to the Israeli political arena. Keep it up! --Fyrefli 20:00, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yes, it's exactly how I feel, although I don't know that I could have described my sentiments as clearly as you.

Not a problem, the guy clearly has a PoV he ants to push, he's not even trying to hide it. - pm_shef 21:19, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oiboy

Honestly, I haven't looked at his other edits, and if he is a vandal, then that is that. Thanks for pointing that out.Smitty Mcgee 15:57, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, he kind of annoys me with all his protestations of innocence...see here for proof of his vandalism.

Considering the definition of Palestine is Isreal in Hebrew. I consider Isreal Palestine. Have you heard of the green line? The term rogue state refers to Israel's lack of recognition to World Law. Invading othert countries at will and attacking civilians. Would you consider WW2 Germany a rogue state? I would. Israel is doing the exact same thing. It has throw out world conventions and accords at it's whim. It does NOT follow UN mandate that was set on it. It is "saved" by US veto power at the UN. When you invade my land and live on it, do I automatically start calling it yours? The article should be moved to 'State of Isreal' and the Palestine and Isreal article should really be merged. --Oiboy77 17:03, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome to your opinion. But it is just that...an opinion, and a pretty extreme one at that. When you put that opnion into articles and then complain that they are not npov, and when you change the name of a recognized country because you don't like it, that is vandalism. The fact that you consider Israel and Palestine to be one and the same thing is irrelevant...Israel is a recognized state, albeit with ill-defined borders compared to many. Your opinion of Israel does not entitle you to impose it on others, and your later protests over neutrality after your act of vandalism are laughably hypocritical. Schrodingers Mongoose

Creature of bad habits

It looks like Creature of bad habits (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) is a vandalism-only account. My guess is the user page was copied from someone else. It doesn't appear there are any legitimate edits by this user, who only registered three days ago. Fan-1967 20:03, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for clearing that up. I guess I took the assumption of good faith a bit too far! Schrodingers Mongoose 20:05, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, when checking a user who posts content like that, always look at the (contribs). You'll usually get an immediate picture. Fan-1967 20:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Israel tag

He's being deliberately provocative. I'd say it's fine to remove it. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 18:51, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although as you said you prefer to stay out of trouble, I would recommend editing other articles instead e.g. Butterfly. ;-D SlimVirgin ^(talk) 18:53, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Thanks

Haha, np. I actually just wanted to look up mongoose and it actually easier to wikify it then it is type it in the search box since you can do the former by just using your mouse.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 19:39, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vernon and David Wells

I just can't believe this lasted as long on their pages as it did. -- Matty j 20:27, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalized!

Well, it was only a matter of time. Still, to have been targeted by the likes of VaughnWatch and his sockpuppets means I must be doing something right. I think he also managed to accuse me of a being a sockpuppet...a pretty ridiculous allegation if you check my IP and my edit list. I know I haven't edited a thousand pages, but I think I have enough of a track record to discredit any of that nonsense. Many thanks to Sango123 for cleaning up my page while I was away for the Canadian long weekend. Schrodingers Mongoose 00:27, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Massive Jewish Consipracy

On his user page, Sarastro777 has implied that I am a paid agent of the Israeli government because I tried to add a bit of context to a horrendously biased article. When it is pointed out to him that this sort of baseless and unfounded accusation borders on anti-semitic paranoia, he immediately goes on the attack claiming that all noble criticizers of Israel are oppressed by accusations of anti-semitism. I find it interesting that these sort of people do exactly what they accuse their opponents of. They claim you can't criticize Israel without being labeled a Jew-hater. Actually, the real situation today is this: you can't call an Jew-hater a Jew-hater without having them scream "Zionist oppression, I'm just criticizing Israel even though I said Jews are plotting a massive conspiracy to rule the internet." Schrodingers Mongoose

Confused

I was the one who made the changes to the Vernon Wells page. I understand the messy spelling and grammar and whatnot and it could have been cleaned up, but I dont understand the fanboy comment at all. I was simply putting two years of Vernon Wells' career on the page that other people failed to do. How can you write about Vernon Wells career, and totally take out the 2004 and 2005 seasons? Couldn't the whole page seem fanboyish? It doesn't really make sense to me to be honest. I thought about possibly doing it over again this time shorter and less bias, if thats what you meant by fanboy. But I'll only do it if you dont just go ahead and delete it. Don't mean to sound like a jerk, just wondering why it couldn't of been edited. It just seems odd that the only seasons in his page are the good seasons. 2004 and 2005 weren't very good seasons for him so I figured I'd add something in there showing that. The stats were correct and the info. So I'm just asking why it was taken off the page completely? ETod09 21:30, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I probably shouldn't have reverted the whole edit. But I still think the whole thing was getting a little amateurish. If you put back the initial changes, I'll try editing instead of deleting. I think I was just tired. Schrodingers Mongoose 03:52, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I didnt really mean to come off as a jerk you know, it was just a head scratcher to me that the whole 2004 and 2005 seasons were never put it. Those were 2 seasons in which I though were an integral part of his growth as a player. I'll definately clean it up and make it shorter so that it doesnt sound to amatuerish and whatnot, and if you want to edit it be my guest, I just feel it necessary to add both seasons into the page because a jump from 2003 to 2006 seems a bit odd. On another note the fact the page only pinpoints his good seasons is also odd. I feel that you need to include to two seasons that I spoke of earlier because they are a big part of his career. ETod09 05:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Israel

You are invited to join and participate in WikiProject Israel. Your contributions would be appreciated. --יהושועEric 06:03, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Editor Review

Hey, I've recently put myself up for the Editor Review process. With the (seeming) end of the Vaughan-gate mess, I've been back to normal editing for the last while and wanted some outside opinions as to what kind of job I'm doing; if I'm on the right track, if there's anything I can do to improve, etc. If you have some free time, I'd really appreciate it if you could take a look and leave me some feedback! Thanks. --Chabuk 03:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit to Israel

Hi... could I ask you to explain the reason for your reversion here? You assert that the edit is POV and OR, but the editor in question cites Benny Morris (quoting from a primary source) and a 1987 doctoral disseration as his sources. How is this either POV or OR? I can understand the need to balance this claim by citing a WP:RS competing perspective, but simply reverting it is hard to distinguish from removal vandalism. What was the rationale? --Rrburke 03:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, again. I began a fuller discussion of this topic here and invite you to participate. --Rrburke 21:46, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About Jackie Robinson in the military

I again reinserted a paragraph to the Jackie Robinson article, with a couple of sylistic changes, which you have deleted at least twice in the past few days. Could you please re-read it, as well as my comments on the "Talk" section associated with the article before you delete it again or before you edit it further. I would at least ask that you explain your opinions to me. I honestly do not know what about that paragraph so galls you. Baseball is something I care about. Please read my autobiographical note entitled Heybai. I contribute to Wikipedia with modest sums of money and have corrected English errors on the Wang article, but this Robinson article is the only one I have written an entire section. Could I ask that you please take a moment to explain your objects, and also, forgive my hasty reaction to your previous comment on the "Talk" section. I do not wish to be contentious. Heybai 02:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC)heybai[reply]

Re: Your response to me on my "Heybai discussion" on Jackie Robinson

Mongoose: You write: "However, to be straightforward, what your have written is not appropriate for Wikipedia, and it will continue to be deleted as a result. I suggest you continue to improve the article through the addition of factual information from non-original sources. Good luck."

I appreciate your respectful tone. I am still not wholly convinced that the deleted paragraph is un- or undersupported by documentation, which I provide earlier in the article, but I am going to let it go rather than wasting our time. We all know "Jackie Robinson" is an important figure. I think the article needs a lot of work, which I do not have time for at the moment. However, my addition of the "Military Career" section seemed an important missing gap. There are others.

By the way, I suppose when you suggest I seek out "non-original sources," to bolster the article I assume you mean just the opposite -- that I look for solid, original sources!

Best regards Heybai 23:56, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Heybai[reply]

P.S. Have a look at the revised paragraph which includes an additional published source, and let me know what you think. Heybai 09:01, 21 April 2007 (UTC)Heybai[reply]

I am responding to your response on my talk section. Please go ahead and edit the Jackie Robinson section as you see fit. I will read it in good faith. Heybai 15:13, 21 April 2007 (UTC)Heybai[reply]

al dura

just from your interest in the article, i thought i'd suggest you see the documentary made by esther shapira - three bullets and a dead child. cheers. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 02:27, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-literate ravings

It's best to avoid meeting the IP's attacks on Talk:Israel with additional incivility. Although you probably did not realize it, the way you pointed out his grammar errors (the excessive use of [sic] and the use of "semi-literate ravings") may be considered incivility. -- tariqabjotu 06:36, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"False sourcing" on Israel

In what way is there "false sourcing" here? -- tariqabjotu 01:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In any event, I reverted your removal. Please re-read the sentence if you still don't understand why there is no false sourcing involved there. Alternatively, we could also add (or instead use) a source that details the "ethnic democracy" theory, but I don't believe that's necessary at this point. The source from The Economist, in my opinion, gets the point across fine. -- tariqabjotu 02:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A note re: Talk:Rorschach test/2009 consensus review

Please be advised that I have recently conducted a review of the Rorschach test (formerly Rorschach inkblot test) talk page and archives. At some point, you have commented on the issue of the display and/or placement of the Rorschach inkblot image. Based on my understanding of your comment(s), I have placed you into one of three categories. I am issuing this note so that you can review how I have placed you, and to signal if this is an appropriate placement and/or to make known your current thoughts on this matter. You may either participate in discussion at the article talk page or leave a note at my talk page; but to keep things in one place, you should also clarify at Talk:Rorschach test/2009 consensus review/addendum. Longer statements may be made here or quick clarifications/affirmations based on several pre-written statements can be made here. Best regards, –xeno^talk 15:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you classified me correctly. You may also be interested to note that there's been a bit of a history of attempts to delete these images from Commons, too: Commons:Talk:Rorschach_inkblot_test. Not sure how relevant it is as far as English Wikipedia is concerned but it involved pretty much the same reasons. Bryan Derksen (talk) 04:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Schrodingers Mongoose! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 0 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Doug Melvin - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 18:42, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]