User talk:RolandR: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 16:34, 29 June 2007 editRolandR (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers32,338 edits →[] again ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 18:23, 15 January 2025 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk \| contribs)Bots, Template editors2,307,002 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:RolandR/Archive 18) (bot
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{User:MiszaBot/config
	{\| class="messagebox" style="background: AntiqueWhite;"
			\|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
	\|-
			\|maxarchivesize = 70K
	\|This talk page is '''automatically archived''' by ]. Any sections older than '''60''' days are automatically archived to ''']'''. Sections without timestamps are not archived.
			\|counter = 18
	\|-
			\|minthreadsleft = 4
	\|}<!-- BEGIN WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE --><!-- This page is automatically archived by Werdnabot-->{{User:Werdnabot/Archiver/Linkhere}} <!--This is an empty template, but transcluding it counts as a link, meaning Werdnabot is directed to this page - DO NOT SUBST IT --><!--Werdnabot-Archive Age-60 DoUnreplied-Yes Target-User talk:RolandR/Archive/Archive 01--><!--END WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE-->
			\|algo = old(31d)
			\|archive = User talk:RolandR/Archive %(counter)d
			}}

	'''Welcome!'''

			{{archives\| search = <yes>}}
	Hello {{PAGENAME}}, and ] to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
	*]
	*]
	*]
	*]
	*]
	*]
	I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out ] or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  ] \| ] 22:10, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

			{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Palestine/Open tasks\|inc_cur=2}}
	== Jewish defense League ==
	It's obvious you have no interest in knowing the truth about the JDL. They are not listed as a terror organization, and no where on the Internet are they published as such. I confirmed this with the FBI on Friday and I suggest you do the same. From your edits it appears you are against Zionism so your edits have a natural reason to be against the JDL and I suggest you refrain from editing that page as you may have a ].
	]

			<span id="63259568085" ></span>
	== ] ==

			== Apologies for not sending this yesterday ==
	Welcome back. I see this article is protected again. Hopefully there will be some way of moving forward toward a consensus version. Let me know if I can be of assistance in discussion at the article's talk page. Â·Â·]] 01:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
	:It may also interest you to know that there was ] regarding this article, but negative results on the two accounts checked. Hit my talk page if you need me. Â·Â·]] 01:54, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

			Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at ] regarding a possible violation of an ] decision. The thread is ''']'''. <!--Template:AE-notice--> Thank you. ] (]) 02:41, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
	Thank you. I had intended to submit the same checkuser/sockpuppet request, as I am certain -- irrespective of Jpgordon's findings -- that these are linked accounts. Further, I believe them to be linked to ], who earlier made similar edits. In fact, they are very likely Plaut himself, or his associates; and probably linked to the ] vandal who persistently defaces pages with abuse of me and others. Anything you can do to help would be appreciated.] 14:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

			== ''The Signpost'': 24 December 2024 ==
	==Deir Yassin==

			<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2024-12-24}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 18--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 00:02, 25 December 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
	Hi there Roland. I've noticed your support of my edit on the DY page.
			<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1263792399 -->

			== Books & Bytes – Issue 66 ==
	Amuroso on the talk page just posted a link which he claims contains an outright denial of the DY massacre from Milstein. While I still think it breaches WP:UNDUE to give equal billing to Milstein's views over the 160+ books that have endorsed the massacre claim, it might be helpful in the talk page debate to get a confirmation of what Milstein has actually said in this article, as well as the date the article was published and maybe even a partial translation of the article's more important points. Since you apparently read Hebrew yourself, would you be interested in helping out in that regard? Thanks, ] 03:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

			<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr">
	:Sorry Gatoclass, I'm blocked at the moment and can't add anything. <s>But the only Milstein link I can find is to a book I do not have, and which is unlikely to be available in London. I don't intend to buy it for this purpose!</s> ] 10:11, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
			<div style="font-size: 1.5em; margin: 0 100px;">
	:I've found the link on the talk page, and will check it for you later. ] 10:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
			]</div>
			<div style="line-height: 1.2;">
			<span style="font-size: 2em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif">'''The Misplaced Pages Library''': ''Books & Bytes''</span><br />
			Issue 66, November – December 2024
			</div>
			<div style="margin-top: 1.5em; border: 3px solid #ae8c55; border-radius: .5em; padding: 1em 1.5em; font-size: 1.2em;">
			* Les Jours and East View Press join the library
			* Tech tip: Newspapers.com
			<big>''']'''</big>
			</div>
			</div>
			<small>Sent by ] on behalf of The Misplaced Pages Library team --17:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)</small>
			<!-- Message sent by User:Samwalton9 (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=The_Wikipedia_Library/Newsletter/Recipients&oldid=28051347 -->

			== ''The Signpost'': 15 January 2025 ==
	==Counterpunch==

			<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2025-01-15}} </div><!--Volume 21, Issue 1--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 07:55, 15 January 2025 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
	I not sure if your still banned or not, but when you get unbanned could you come to the talk page and give me some back-up. Some zionist hoodlum named anti-fascist is trying to post the thing about Alan Cabal and Ernest Zundel again and sadly Bobfrombockley seems to be supporting him. I think these charges are flimsy at best and are nothing more than a transparent attempt to bias the article against counterpunch. I feel I need some back-up on this so could you help me out please. ] 19:49, 28 April (UTC)
			<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1269316164 -->

	:As it happens, I don't really disagree with those edits. I would probably rephrase some of it, but the substance is to my mind valid, and documented.
	:However, I agree with your anger at ]'s libellous attack on you. <nowiki>I think that you should consider placing an abusive edit summary warning {{subst:Edit summary personal 3}} on his talk page</nowiki> ] 21:33, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

	:I understand your concerns and I know how sincere they are, but I think in this case they are unfounded. This article is already has enough accusations against Counterpunch of anti-semitism and this point it's starting to feel a little overloaded with this type of criticism. Nothing Cabal or Mcgowan have said has directly endorsed Holocaust Denial and I don't think Counterpunch should be berated because they publish articles by them. The question is there anything in counterpunch that directly endorses holocaust denial and the simple answer is no! It seems rather silly to criticise and organization because they feature articles by these people when nothing in these articles can construed as holocaust denial. If you have a criticism of them than go after them, not counterpunch because they dare to allow them to speak freely.

	:I have said before that I'm fine with adding Israel Shamir to your Jew against Zionism criticism, because beleive it or not I actually believe theres more of a reason to criticise counterpunch over him than over Atzmon. I actually think that atzmon, although crude in his phrasing is simply misunderstood, whereas Shamir seems to me like a right winger who seems to have fooled people into thinking he's a left-winger.

	:Neverthless thank you for your support in regards to anti-fascist's comments. I guess I was just asking for support in case I get threatened with a ban if I stick up for my views too hardly. However, I fully understand if don't wish to get involved, who needs the aggrevation right?

	:I hope you get unbanned and keep fighting the good fight. ] 01:25, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

	==Invitation==

	{\| class="messagebox standard-talk plainlinks" style="padding:5px; width:auto;"
	\| ]
	\| ] is looking for editors to help build and maintain comprehensive, informative, balanced articles related to Palestine on Misplaced Pages. Start by adding your name to the list of members at ]. ''Ahlan wa Sahlan!'' Welcome!
	\|} ] 16:15, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

	== Your stalker again ==

	. I noticed you vandalism page and thus user has the name Roland in it. --] 23:32, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

	== Your report ==

	Hello — I've removed your report at ]. That page is intended for cases of simple and persistant vandals who have received a final warning. ] only appears to have one abusive edit. Sock puppetry should be reported at ]. Happy editing! — ] <FONT SIZE="-2">]</FONT> 11:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
	:Looks like a complex case. Most of the IPs don't seem very persistent though, so maybe semi-protection is the way to go? I suppose problems like this are inevitable when dealing with politically-charged topics. Best of luck — ] <FONT SIZE="-2">]</FONT> 04:39, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

	== Re: Vandalism report ==

	Re : No warnings were issued at the time of the report on AIV. You , I , and then you . The warning issued previous to yours was for edits in March. With anonymous and potentially shared IPs like this one, warnings are not necessarily cumulative like user accounts or non-shared IPs. While the edits you reported were certainly egregious, a warning should still be issued before the report to AIV. Additionally, your warning and report to AIV was done nearly two hours after the last edit occurred and was reverted by another editor. -- ] 18:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

	== East Jerusalem ==

	Hi. It seems that your revert in the ] article was to a bad version by me which I self-reverted. This version is bad because it repeats the "Israelis of all religions" bit (see previous sentence).--] 15:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

	== Palestine Userboxes ==

	Thanks for the heads up on the PalReturn UBX. I have requested a deletion review ]. As for the one-state UBX, I don't care to get into a prolonged discussion about the matter. Suffice it to say, I agree that the two terms are not ''necessarily'' synonymous; however, in general usage I think they are and, in my experience, most people who support a binational solution have in mind a one-state solution in all of Palestine. For instance, the ] article begins with "The binational solution, also known as the One-State Solution ... " --] 19:57, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

	== ] ==

	Roland, I don't know how to be more clear about this. Do '''not''' insert this ]-violating material again. Instead, come to the Talk: page, and engage in the discussion on the page. You came ''very'' close to being blocked today; I don't want that to happen. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 00:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

	I am not violating ] by posting a DEFENCE of someone being libelled and defamed. You have absolutely no justifcation for blocking, or threatening to block, me. and I consider your behaviour to be an unacceptable attempt to bully me into complying with your anti-Finkelstein agenda. But it won't work; I have not acted against either the letter or the spirit of Misplaced Pages. I have reported your breach of ] ] 01:23, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
	:I have no anti-Finkelstein agenda. I do have an anti-] violation agenda. ] is quite clear that 3RR does not apply to ] violations. This is not a game, Roland. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 01:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

	==Your 3RR report==
	Hello, Roland. I am the admin who dealt with your 3RR report about Jayjg. I want to stress that BLP is something that Misplaced Pages takes very, very seriously, and it's best to err on the side of caution. If someone other than an obvious troll removes something, citing BLP, and you disagree, it's a really bad idea to revert. I've been following an ArbCom case where an administrator who had absolutely no history of vandalism or trolling undeleted some articles which had been deleted citing BLP. She didn't do it with the intention of harming Misplaced Pages; she simply thought that the articles shouldn't have been deleted. She's now facing an admonition with threat of desysopping in the ArbCom rulings.

	Regarding the way you submitted your report, the administrator dealing with the case needs to be able to click on "first revert", "second revert", etc., to see that it really is a revert. If you look at the history of any article, you'll see times given for each version. If you click on the time/date, you will then be looking at a particular version. It will say at the top that it was the version edited at a particular time by a particular editor. It's called a "version". However, if, instead of clicking on the time/date, you click on "last", you will get something that shows you the difference between that version and the previous one, with the name of the editors, and the times and dates. That's called a diff. Here is a diff for a revert I made. You can see from the edit summary that it was a revert. (Actually, I was reverting vandalism.) If you just show the version , there is absolutely nothing to show what my edit involved. For a valid 3RR report, you need to start by giving the '''''version''''' that was reverted to, if it's possible. (Sometimes it isn't, when people are making lots of complex reverts.) Then (and this is important) you need to give a '''''diff''''' for each of the four reverts, with the times and dates clearly stated. You simply gave '''''versions''''' for each of the reverts.

	However, I would like to point out that reporting someone who is removing a BLP violation is not likely to result in a block for the person reported. At most, it might result in a block from an admin who hadn't looked into it properly, followed by indignant discussion at an admin noticeboard, followed by unblocking. I hope that all helps. Regards. ] ] 21:48, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

	:Thank you for your helpful response. I will be more careful in any future 3RR reports.

	:However, I do not agree that there was any BLP violation at all in this instance. Finkelstein is being attacked by Dershowitz, and Menetzer carefully studied the allegations, concluding that there is no merit in any of them. When the link was originally posted, Jayjg objected, on the grounds that it was published in CounterPunch, which he rejects (wrongly, in kmy view) as an unacceptable source. As you will see in the 3RR discussion, SlimVirgin accepts that Menetzer is an okay source, but also argues that CounterPunch is unreliable. Rather than argue the merits of CounterPunch, I found another version of the article; this time on Finkelstein's own site. Jayjg then dropped his claim that the source was unacceptable, and instead claimed that this was a BLP violation and should be deleted even if found in a reliable location.

	:I see several problems here. Jayjg is repeatedly making disputed edits, and shifting his ground in defence of them. He is also acting as an admin on the same article, semi-protecting it and making threats (see above) to block editors who repost this important link. And we are, in effect, denying Finkelstein the opportunity to respond to very serious allegations against him -- allegations which have cost him his job, and which have been found by Menetzer to be unfounded, and, in at least one instance, even deliberately fraudulent.

	:How can we resolve the disagreement over whether there is any BLP violation here? ] 00:11, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

	==] again==

	I see above that you are having trouble with the policy regarding ]. Restoring unsourced or improperly sourced content, as you did on ], by saying that the information is "useful" is a clear violation of a critical policy. Do not restore this information again unless you can provide valid sources to back it up. \| ] 13:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

	:The sentences which I added, and which you have again deleted as "unsourced", are in fact the '''only''' sourced statements in the entire article. What is your problem with them? ] 14:04, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

	::You are mistaken; there are sources for other statements - the paragraph following the one I deleted, for example, is properly sourced, since it provides a link to the document he signed - and there are sources at the bottom, such as his Nobel Prize biography, that verify much of the other content. I went after that one paragraph because it was the one paragraph that wasn't sourced at all. Most of what you re-inserted is acceptable, but the sentence that states that his works have aroused controversy in Portugal '''must''' be sourced, per ]. \| ] 16:13, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

	:::There is a link to the document he signed since I inserted it. I repeat, the only sourced statements are those I inserted. For instance, there is no source for "Saramago was in his mid-fifties before he won international acclaim", for "It was the 1988 publication of his Baltasar and Blimunda that first brought him to the attention of an English-speaking readership", or for "This novel won the Portuguese PEN Club Award" in the first paragraph alone. It seems very strange to me that the only statements you removed on blp grounds were the sourced ones which i had inserted, and not any of the others.

Latest revision as of 18:23, 15 January 2025

Archives

Index

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10	Archive 11	Archive 12
Archive 13	Archive 14	Archive 15
Archive 16	Archive 17	Archive 18

This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.