This user may have left Wikipedia. Zargulon has not edited Wikipedia since 29 August 2017. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.
Do you mind if we continue this discussion here ? I think it is getting off topic. If you would like to discuss the merits of Kahana Vs Boteach, and which is a chilul h', we can do that. I just don't think it belongs on wikipedia. yisraeldov (talk) 13:47, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Are you familiar with "אין דורשין בעריות בשלשה ברבים" ? It means that we don't talk about things that happen between husband and wife in public. Also חז''ל were very carful not to engage in public debates with non jews on the topic of religion. Why is he the only rabbi who is doing things like these ?
Have you ever read anything from R' Kahana (H'YD) ? While you might not agree with his politics his views on judiasim seem to be very standard, although his politics might not be. If you have time, I suggest trying Uncomfortable questions for comfortable jews. If you don't agree with him, at least it is thought provoking. yisraeldov (talk) 14:15, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have not read anything from Kahane but I have seen some interviews with him.. I am happy to try to take a look at the book you recommend. But even if his views on Judaism are mainstream, the world (including a lot of Jews) overwhelmingly know him as the mentor of Baruch Goldstein, and for me that makes it a Chillul Hashem to elevate him in our society, even were he in fact been big chasid with big a reward in the world to come. If he really were a chasid, I think he would agree with this. As for your remarks about Boteach - yes those principles are certainly relevant, but there is a difference between lowering a fence for what at least he sees as a legitimate educational purpose, and rejecting it entirely. Regarding interaction with gentiles, Boteach doesn't pretend to be Chazal (sorry I don't know how to type Hebrew on my Keyboard), and again I feel if his purpose is to be a presence for Jews challenged by the secular world, that is a justification. It is not as if there is no precedent in tradition.. the Kuzari springs to mind..? Zargulon (talk) 14:30, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand why you are listing already-translated articles at WP:PNT. This project is for pages that partially or wholly need translation, usually in the former case there are quotes that need translation, or in the latter that they have been dumped into English wWikipedia from other Wikipedias or from other sources. I don't understand your motive for adding them here.
Can you please enlighten me what you expect to be done with them? I think PNT probably is the wrong place to list them, but I am sure we can guide you to a better place to list them.
Thanks for the reply at my talk page. I am not quite sure what you mean by "instructions", but I see that the template says "please see this article's entry on Pages needing translation into English for discussion". My guess is from that you decided to list at PNT, whereas, also guessing, the normal way around would be for it to be listed at PNT then have its translation templates replaced by cleanup-translation once the main translation is done but fixes by a subject expert were thought needed.
I have no problem with your way of doing it, but it did puzzle me. In any case, I had already moved them to the "Pages needing cleanup after translation" section, where probably you would have been better off putting them in the first place. That being said, I can imagine it would be thought unusual suddenly to find a page appearing in that section that had never appeared as needing translation, so I can see your bind.
Might I suggest, perhaps, then, that if other articles of this kind come your way, you list them as you did in the top section of PNT, but make it clearer that they need cleanup (so as to let someone else move them down, rather than simply listing in the section below yourself). I myself, and a few others, tend to let someone else move/delete entries about articles we have translated, to let others give an opinion, rather than just do it ourselves, so perhaps that would be a good compromise in your case too? The instructions are almost inevitably followed, it just then allows for a second opinion. e.g. after writing as you did for your articles, put "Suggest move to cleanup section", that would be all that is needed I suspect.
("Add at the bottom")... ah. I did not see that, as I simply looked at the documents and not at the template itself, which I have now looked at. I suppose it depends on your interpretation of what "at the bottom" means; you took it to mean at the bottom of the "Pages for consideration" section, whereas I would interpret it as at the bottom of the "Pages needing cleanup after translation" section (which is also the bottom of the whole document). I think it's a little fragile anyway to assume that the second is also the last section in the document.
So, since it seems genuinely ambiguous and a little fragile, I would suggest a rewording. It's probably best to take this to the tempalate's talk page, but to get your opinion first, how about just putting explicitly "at the bottom of the Translated pages that could still use some cleanup section of WP:Pages needing translation into English". I would also suggest changing "please add" to "please consider adding", because there may be articles which an editor does not consider useful to list at PNT (e.g. if they are in other projects/categories where a subject expert is more likely to look than PNT). I imagine that cleanup-translation was originally intended specifically for articles originating at PNT (or other translation request pages) but I don't see that that needs must be the case (and if it is, it should say so explicitly at the doc page).
I would also change the title of the section from "Translated pages that could still use some cleanup", which sounds a bit informal to me, to "Pages requiring cleanup after translation". Perhaps you have a better suggestion? We can add a redirect anyway, so if the section name changes we just change the redirect.
I'm copying this to the talk page at WP:PNT, together with your replies at my talk page interspersed. Probably best to continue any discussion there. SimonTrew (talk) 08:42, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know the translation from German is "Austrian Freedom Front", but in the sources in French mentioning it, including from that period (see here), the second name in French is "Front national autrichien", it was not a translation mistake. Thanks for having finished the translation from French to English. After further readings tonight (e.g. here ), I see that there were also French and Austrian chapters of the Ö.F.F. which I overlooked when writing the original French article about a year ago :-/ --Pylambert (talk) 21:34, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.
If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:42, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009)
The October 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:42, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XIV (November 2009)
The November 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:18, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)
The December 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 14:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Zargulon! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 2 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 05:11, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your nice message and you did a fair and evenhanded edit on that page.
Frankly, I am becoming a bit disillusioned by the Wikipedia concept.
The United States Patent Office no longer allows Examiners to cite Wikipedia as a reference for anything because the pages keep changing, can be hacked and edited by anyone, and frankly, are just not trustworthy sources of information.
Anything the slightest bit controversial is often hacked by fervent supporters or opponents of the issue.
In the instance of Shine, it seems there is a group of strong-willed supporters (who may in fact work for Helfgott, who runs a small "Shine" industry) that edit the pages relating to him, the movie, and his sister's book, and also spam the netflix, amazon, IMDB and any other review site with laudatory reviews.
In a way this is a troubling trend on the Internet in general. Many fraudsters running bogus operations of various types go onto review sites (which themselves are often bogus or harbors for Trojans) and post self-laudatory reviews. Some review sites pay reviewers for writing reviews or give them "credits" for reviews.
It maybe started out as Democracy but has morphed into Anarchy.
But perhaps that is part of the game - to read these entries and edits and then try to figure out who wrote what and who edited or deleted what, and then figure out why and the motivations of the players and they try to discern a real truth.
(With every entry I read now, I always go to the "Talk" page to see what is up. I've seen raging controversies on pages innocuous as Dr. Seuss "Fox in Socks".) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe Patent (talk • contribs) 15:52, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And in a way, perhaps the same could be said of traditional encyclopedias, biographies (autobiographies in particular) and history in general. People write things from a certain slant, which can be achieved often by simply failing to mention some facts while emphasizing others.
"Truth is Beauty, and Beauty Truth" right?
Anyway, you did a nice edit. I wonder how long it will stay that way.. ;)
The February 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:35, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:16, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, your interpretation of the three-revert rule, as noted here, is wrong. You are not entitled to three reverts in a given 24-hour period. If you are clearly edit-warring, especially when it's coupled by the non-collaborative tone exhibited therein, there are still grounds for a block. I suggest you re-read WP:3RR because ignorance of the rule, despite being pointed to the page multiple times, is not a valid defense against a block. -- tariqabjotu21:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)
The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:53, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
Hi, thanks for your comments on this and the Manouchian Group. They are fascinating, and now that European websites are being translated into other languages (in some cases), even more information is available. I've gotten interested in the many immigrants involved and came across some great info on the Hungarian artists and writers.Parkwells (talk) 22:20, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 20:49, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:51, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Z, I'll answer this way, as I don't think this is of general interest. "Weak suace" is a term for a very weak agrguement. I've never really understood the argument "X was never true untill Y happened", with the implication that therefore X was never true. Doesn't make any sence to me. JWF is fond the of the same line of reasoning, with his "noboby ever thought that RD was the CD untill Goethe did". Not sure that its a true statement, but even if it is, I don't get the point of it. 02:15, 12 September 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve kap (talk • contribs)
Steve, I don't know what you are talking about. Firstly, I am not JFW, I have no idea who he is or anything about him, and he and I are not on some sort of team together as you keep seeming to suggest. Secondly, what is "X"? I can't find any reasonable substitution for "X" where what you say would make sense. Zargulon (talk) 11:52, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. When you recently edited Baccarat, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Modulo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. When you recently edited Blackjack Switch, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wager (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
There's no consensus for the current revision of the infobox that was produced (there's only a consensus for certain criteria, such as including a religious figure, and including a proportion of women), some of the figures chosen were extremely controversial and akin to having Lenin in the Russian infobox (Emma Goldman!) and one of them is a Nazi supporter (Gertrude Stein), while others (that I had originally added, such as Feynman and Gety Cori) were removed for no reason. I have introduced unarguably less controversial choices, according to the recommendations that you were able to make in talk, and most of these choices do have a genuine consensus from the long discussions we had about who to include (and who not to include) for the Ashkenazi infobox photos in 2009 (Gershwin and Von Neumann got a lot votes in those discussions).
Avaya1 (talk) 14:28, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. When you recently edited Climont, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Are (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Sorry if I misunderstood you - i thought it directly answered your question. Anyway, would you mind confirming whether you have any concerns about the text you reverted, or we're you just commenting on my edit comment? Oncenawhile (talk) 12:39, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't like it, but I probably wouldn't have troubled to revert it if you hadn't claimed to be acting on my behalf. Zargulon (talk) 13:56, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 10:11, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muslim Action Committee until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Jason from nyc (talk) 21:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Genocide definitions until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Oncenawhile (talk) 09:48, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Voting for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year now open!
Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81
Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Time is running out to voting for the Military Historian and Newcomer of the year! If you have not yet cast a vote, please consider doing so soon. The voting will end on 31 December at 23:59 UTC, with the presentation of the awards to the winners and runners up to occur on 1 January 2017. For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:01, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This message was sent as a courtesy reminder to all active members of the Military History WikiProject.
G'day all, please be advised that throughout March 2017 the Military history Wikiproject is running its March Madness drive. This is a backlog drive that is focused on several key areas:
tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
updating the project's currently listed A-class articles to ensure their ongoing compliance with the listed criteria
creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various task force pages or other lists of missing articles.
As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.
The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the military history scope will be considered eligible. More information can be found here for those that are interested, and members can sign up as participants at that page also.
The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 March and runs until 23:59 UTC on 31 March 2017, so please sign up now.
Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Zargulon. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
As we approach the end of the year, the Military History project is looking to recognise editors who have made a real difference. Each year we do this by bestowing two awards: the Military Historian of the Year and the Military History Newcomer of the Year. The co-ordinators invite all project members to get involved by nominating any editor they feel merits recognition for their contributions to the project. Nominations for both awards are open between 00:01 on 2 December 2017 and 23:59 on 15 December 2017. After this, a 14-day voting period will follow commencing at 00:01 on 16 December 2017. Nominations and voting will take place on the main project talkpage: here and here. Thank you for your time. For the co-ordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.
G'day all, please be advised that throughout April 2018 the Military history Wikiproject is running its annual backlog elimination drive. This will focus on several key areas:
tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
adding or improving listed resources on Milhist's task force pages
updating the open tasks template on Milhist's task force pages
creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various lists of missing articles.
As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.
The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the scope of military history will be considered eligible. This year, the Military history project would like to extend a specific welcome to members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red, and we would like to encourage all participants to consider working on helping to improve our coverage of women in the military. This is not the sole focus of the edit-a-thon, though, and there are aspects that hopefully will appeal to pretty much everyone.
The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 April and runs until 23:59 UTC on 30 April 2018. Those interested in participating can sign up here.
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused.[reply]
Hi Zargulon! I am tracing my family lineage and I am curious to learn more about Cecile Cerf and Moshe Shalit! Your contributions to their pages were fascinating, and I would love to know where you got your information from. Thanks, and feel free to contact me through my page: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Angvoh —Preceding undated comment added 08:15, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Seems totally unnotable. Only sources are related to sports clubs that this club have partnered with. Only source to ever cover this has been a passing mention (one sentence) in the Spectator news.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Young Chelsea Bridge Club until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ser! (let's discuss it). 13:51, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Zargulon! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 2 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
