User talk:Hypnosadist

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Hypnosadist, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  gidonb 18:13, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Welcome to the Military history WikiProject!

Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

  • Starting some new articles? Our article structure guidelines outline some things to include.
  • Interested in working on a more complete article? The military history peer review and collaboration departments would welcome your help!
  • Interested in a particular area of military history? We have a number of task forces that focus on specific nations or periods.
  • Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every military history article in Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Kirill Lokshin 15:53, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue IV - June 2006

The June 2006 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. Kirill Lokshin 05:51, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Task force

Given that I'm currently involved in an arbitration case with many of the putative combatants, I'm slightly hesitant to make any rash moves here. I'd much prefer, personally, if we had some measure of internal consensus on the best way to proceed, as well as a bit more interest from project members willing to participate in the task force once it's created. Kirill Lokshin 13:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ANI

An AN/I discussion is up focusing on various personal attacks by H.E. against you and me. It's over at here. - Merzbow 01:45, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually that's poor misrepresentation of the ANI. The ANI is against YOU (Merzbow) for your usage of warning templates for threat and intimidation against myself and one other user, who has now responded to the ANI. So far, I've kept Hypnosadist out of the matter since I have no personal quarrel with him, just a difference of opinion. As the statement I made, which you (Merzbow) is being framed as a personal attack, it's inevitable I need to bring mention on the content that statement is in response to, and present a link to the Criticism of Islam talk page. Anyway, Hypnosadist, take a look at what's going on and add your view if you'd like to. His Excellency... 01:52, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Persecution of pagans

Thanks for your thanks. That was quick! Itsmejudith 19:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Check out Battle of the beanfield and New age travellers for some stuff that might well be relevant to this page. If it is, then the archives of the UK newspapers will provide a mountain of detail. Itsmejudith 09:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unbiased?

I don't believe either that it is possible to be unbiased. I do believe (in principle at least) in the Global Commons, therefore in the idea of Wikipedia, therefore in NPOV - until I am convinced otherwise. Some of the most POV-disputed articles are some of the best. It is miraculous how far you can go by describing what each side in a controversy thinks. By contrast, one of the worst is "Community", something everyone likes, but no-one knows anything about. Itsmejudith 21:47, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Touché! For example, I think the current fight over waterboarding actually makes it a tighter and weightier article. I've been comparing it to Evolution and Global warming and I see it "evolving" (no pun intended) in the same direction. I.e., an article that demonstrates the strength of wikipedia. If you can't back up your propositions, they won't float. I think of it as "The truth will out" or as Stephen Colbert would say, "reality has a liberal bias." Hey, it's 1:04 am in St. Louis and I'm REALLY dragging here. But you made a cogent point. -- Quartermaster (talk) 06:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks very much Hypnosadist! Hypnosadist, I can see lots of discussions on the talk page of Dhimmi since last week (and other pages). Would you please let me know the sections of the talk page of Dhimmi in which the discussion is not settled down yet, so that I would be able to follow it. Thanks again! --Aminz 23:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

P.S. I can see lots of your posts on the Dhimmi talk page. Thanks for your efforts.--Aminz 23:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I haven't followed the posts to the Arbcom page recently. I'll catch up in a minute. --Aminz 00:26, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


An Award
Barnstar awarded (along with the best wishes :P) by Aminz to Hypnosadist for his friendliness, hardwork and being a very helpful editor in wikipedia. --Aminz 00:48, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Ditto! -- Quartermaster (talk) 06:09, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


You deserved it! Unfortunately, I know nothing about Al-manar and haven't heard about it before so I am not sure if I could be helpful there. --Aminz 01:25, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Break time from Dhimmi

~~~ has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Shifting alliances or what???? Itsmejudith 20:08, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for your suggestion on the talk page of Dhimmi

Template:Smile2 the idea of including further details was inspiring. Aminz 21:07, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] H.E's classic I'm not anti-semitic i just hate "the Jews"

I am keeping this bit of filth for evidence and show.http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration%2FHis_excellency%2FEvidence&diff=69701704&oldid=69699623

In my own defense: A man has a right to his opinion. I do feel Timothy Usher is a bigot. I do feel that Jews are screwing up the planet (though admittedly Muslims, by far, surpass the Jews in their capacity to destroy things). Look at history. Only recently has it become the norm to like Jews. That only came about after certain countries (eg America) adopted them as the collective dame-in-distress needing shelter and protection. Sort of the precursor to the chihuahua. Before then, Jews were hated in Europe and America alike..And everywhere else. We all know Jews were once banished from most culturally superior European countries. The only reason why Poland took them in was that they had loads of money. Probably the same reason why Washington panders to the now. Point is, alot of people dislike Jews. I'm entitled to, so long as I don't demonstrate that dislike on articles dealing with the topic of Jews. We don't penalize people for not liking things, do we? His Excellency... 00:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Is that not sick?Hypnosadist 20:49, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Harassment

I've blocked you for 3 hours; your mass messaging has crossed the line into harassment[1][2]. Take a break, and come back when you've cooled off. — Matt Crypto 12:51, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Civility

Regarding edit: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --InShaneee 22:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

If you cannot act civil, YOU will be dealt with accordingly, like it or not. --InShaneee 22:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Not biting the newbies and allowing them to do as they please are two very different things. --InShaneee 22:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Regarding this:

This is your last warning. If you continue to make personal attacks, you may be blocked for disruption. --InShaneee 22:31, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Regarding this: You have now been blocked for making personal attacks. --InShaneee 16:20, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

For how long? you forgot say! Hypnosadist 18:15, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
PS have you actually read this InShaneee.

Remedies If you are personally attacked, you should ask the attacker to stop and note this policy. If he or she continues, consider following the dispute resolution process. You might also consider removing particularly clear-cut personal attacks per the guideline WP:RPA; however, you should be very careful not to define "personally attack" too broadly, or to do this too frequently. From a recent arbitration committee finding-of-fact:

The remove personal attacks guideline (and the application thereof) is controversial. It has often been abused by malefactors, and may not have community consensus. It should, at most, be interpreted strictly and used sparingly. [1] If you find yourself using this remedy frequently, you should reconsider your definition of "personal attack." When in doubt, follow the dispute resolution process instead.

In extreme cases, an attacker may be blocked under the "disruption" clause of the blocking policy, though the practice is almost always controversial. Personal attacks should be reported at WP:PAIN.

I've removed your personal attack above and extended your block. Those who cannot be respectful will not be allowed to disrupt the work of others. --InShaneee 21:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
And you've warned by others and arb com not to delete "personal attacks" on peoples talk pages, PUT IT BACK!Hypnosadist 23:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
PS you have constantly failed to be respectful to me, youve been threating and upperty.Hypnosadist 00:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Well done

The Resilient Barnstar
For finishing with a smile. KP Botany 02:03, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Hypnosadist, for going one step further than anyone had the right to ask you when you were thoroughly pissed off. Thanks for actually listening to what some people were trying to say to you, when no one seemed to be listening to what you were saying. KP Botany 02:03, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smile!

Saber girl08 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.


Saber girl08 16:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trolling

I've blocked you for a week. Please do not troll.[3][4]. — Matt Crypto 19:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't be silly that is not trolling, i've repeatedly asked for sources that meet wp:att, they still continue to insult a faith and claim concensus when it clearly does not exist. Hypnosadist 19:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
And a week is just taking the mick! Hypnosadist 19:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
This admin is involved in a content dispute with me and that clearly violates precedure
I'll be going to dispute resolution at the end of the Block as this is a clear abuse of admin powers to force me off a page to support his views. Hypnosadist 20:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Anyone reviewing this block should be aware that A) I have not, at least to my recollection, ever edited the article in question (Flying Spaghetti Monster); and that B) My talk page posts about the article have been pretty much asking people not to post disingenuously about this topic. — Matt Crypto 20:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
As in he routinely acusses me and other editors of being disingenuous in violation of good faith and civilty policies. Hypnosadist 01:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)


== Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Waterboarding

==

Please see the above link as I have requested arbitration for a dispute that you are involved in. Feel free to contribute there. Regards, henrik•talk 11:44, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

for your helpful comments on the waterboarding RfC. You managed to help me understand the WikiCulture/History while still making me feel welcome. My two years of popping in, editing an article and popping out certainly didn't prepare me for what lay beyond.

Interestingly, I think perhaps my isolation in the ivory tower might have made me blind to the obvious controversy and passions on this sensitive subject. I and several other members of the group have learned criminal law from a liberal that argues torture might not always be wrong [5] and a right wing one who was accused of justifying torture while actually fighting it from within the Bush administration [6]. Three years of very convincing views being presented by some of America's most brilliant academics have a way of pressing "reset" on all your assumptions. It also makes you take polite, intellectual discourse for granted. Ergo, my own views on the subject are surprisingly neutral and in flux.

Anyway, do let me know if you are ever working on an article, project, etc that I might be of use on. Thank you again for your help. -Lciaccio (talk) 03:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Anthøny 16:40, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding

This Arbitration case has closed, and the final decision may be reviewed through the above link. Further to the relevant findings of fact, Waterboarding and all closely-related pages are subject to article probation (full remedy); editors working on Waterboarding, or closely related pages, may be subject to an editing restriction at the discretion of any uninvolved administrator, whereby any edits by that editor which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, may result in a block. (full remedy).

Should any user subject to an editing restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeated violations. After 5 blocks, the maximum block length shall increase to one year (full enforcement). Before such restrictions are enacted on an editor, he or she must be issued with a warning containing a link to the decision.

For the Arbitration Committee,
AGK (talk) 14:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] waterboarding source arguments

  • Rudolph Giuliani does not say "waterboarding is not torture" infact he says "IF it is like its discribed in the liberal media then its torture", he qualifies that statement saying the media don't always tell the truth. Waterboarding is like the liberal media discribe it so Rudi thinks waterboarding is torture. (Hypnosadist) 23:27, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Michael Mukasey, friend of Rudolph Giuliani again did not say "waterboarding is not torture" he refused to give a comment on it. His current position is that the OLC approved waterboarding (in 2002) so he can't ask people to be charged for following the OLC's order. Other notable legal sources have pointed out that "Just obaying orders" is not a defence and the OLC does not have the right to unilaterally decide what crimes should be prosecuted . (Hypnosadist) 15:39, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Andrew C. McCarthy, says Might not be torture (note this is a US legal definition, not an UNCAT definition or a common english definition) in some cases BUT he goes on to say "waterboarding is close enough to torture that reasonable minds can differ on whether it is torture". This does not constitute a rousing defence, its more like a Lawyer (McCarthy or Neutral Good) looking for reasonable doubt. (Hypnosadist) 15:50, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Ted Poe, a man who quotes notables such as a Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan in his speeches, does actually say "waterboarding is not torture". I feel it is safe for me to say his opinion is that of the extreme right of the republican party in america. He is a legal man but has no experience in the Laws of War or Human Rights Law. He is a notable source and is used in the article, but his opinion on its own or with the range of right-wing extremeist punidits that agree with him are not enough to say "waterboarding is not torture" in wikipedia. (Hypnosadist) 15:58, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Trying this again, thanks for agreeing to participate

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Waterboarding 2, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, Neutral Good (talk) 02:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC) Neutral Good (talk) 02:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Muhammad/images

Thank you. That was all I was asking for. I was too deep into it to do it myself.-MasonicDevice (talk) 18:19, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Grumble... Now it's back... -MasonicDevice (talk) 19:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Waterboarding 2.
For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 19:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)

The February 2008 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) 04:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Anonymous IP on fitna talk page?

In this talk section, you say "Removed WP quote i posted.", but I thought that it was added in this comment. Please tell me that that comment wasn't you logged out! Andjam (talk) 12:44, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unintentional revert

You were quite correct to censure me for this edit to the Fitna (film) article. I missed out on those intermediate revisions of yours. I don't know if I missed any warnings, as I believe there usually is a warning if edits have been made while a new edit is being prepared. In any case, I was only intending to revert the one revision which you obviously realized judging from your edit summary. Cheers! __meco (talk) 21:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)

The March 2008 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) 01:26, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Al Mouftinoun

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Al Mouftinoun, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 08:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Would this be an entry, due to its current status, more appropriate to be included in the main wikipedia article on the producer, the Arab European League? Maybe not notable enough (in English) to stand alone, but still of interest. Not something close to my heart, but its existence and the broader context appear to be worth preserving at first pass. I'm not going to weigh in officially, just suggesting. -- Quartermaster (talk) 12:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Al Mouftinoun

An editor has nominated Al Mouftinoun, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Mouftinoun and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 13:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] POV?

"daring climb" is POV, is it? POV in what way? POV because you think it criticises them, or because you think it praises them? I was the one who wrote that, and I had no POV one way or the other, so I'm very curious to know what POV you read into what I wrote. Not that it matters; I'm not going to put it back in. Aridd (talk) 16:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. I thought you might say the opposite and consider "daring" to be a rebuke of their breakneck and foolhardy activities. Anyway, we'll leave it out. Aridd (talk) 17:16, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] change the title of the section to "Olympic media coverage"

Could you please change the title of the section to "Olympic media coverage"? I'm new user and I can't edit that article now. Thanks!--Jingandteller (talk) 15:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject Terrorism Newsletter

The Terrorism WikiProject
April 2008 Newsletter

News
Archives • Discussion

Sherurcij (Speaker for the Dead) 05:57, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Expelled

Sir, while you are allowed to have your opinion, please do not put down the opinions of others. RC-0722 247.5/1 21:31, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Ditto. Nightscream (talk) 23:17, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors, which you did here: Talk: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. As this is at least a second warning, I suggest you stop referring to others as "deaf", and try to disagree with your opponents constructively. Nightscream (talk) 00:40, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

This is my final warning to you and to all others participating on the Expelled Talk Page. The next time you disrupt the page by violating WP: Civility, discussing things not related to improving the article, reversing deletion of such comments, or any other similar violation, you will be blocked. Nightscream (talk) 04:54, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] pretty damn sad state of affairs

The complete non-answers that we are getting at AN/I are pretty sad - is anyone supposed to be convinced by someone dodging a YES/NO question? --87.112.70.168 (talk) 21:09, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Accusations

Hello,

I thought you should be aware of this - an editor has raised an accusation (of sorts) against you on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Wikilobby campaign (specifically here). This is with respect to the whole CAMERA wiki lobbying affair, if you're aware of it. He claims you might be one of the people involved there, identified as "gilead".

Just thought you ought to know when people are making accusations behind your back.

okedem (talk) 21:53, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for making me aware of this. Screen stalker (talk) 01:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Your behind the times with your defence of Zeq, an admin has given evidence privately that the zeqzeq2 email address goes to user Zeq due to comunications he had well before this whole thing started. Should you be part of this group i have some advice for you, admit it and show that you understand why many wikipedians are very pissed off at this and accept a topic ban on IvP articles. (Hypnosadist) 03:01, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
This is really starting to remind me of the Salem witch trials. Have you read The Crucible? If not, you should. Screen stalker (talk) 12:52, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't see the problem: admit you're a witch, and god will spare your immortal soul. okedem (talk) 13:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Man, if I were a witch, I don't think I'd agree to put up with being hanged. I think I'd much sooner use my magic to get out of the situation... Of course logic doesn't tend to work in these sort of situations. Screen stalker (talk) 13:20, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Insulting editors is not the way to convince people that you are willing to play nice. If you hadn't noticed playing the race card does not go down well. (Hypnosadist) 14:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
I am sorry if you found what I wrote insulting, but I think it's true. I think that there is a group of editors who have decided to pursue this isra-wiki in a manner inconsistent with common decency. I will leave it to you to prove me wrong. I think there are a lot of parallels between this event and similar historical events. Let's face it: this is just wikipedia; the ramifications are nowhere near as great as with McCarthyism, but this is an interesting case study. Screen stalker (talk) 14:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH, WHATEVER. (Hypnosadist) 14:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A good Fisking

"Anyway, I initially forgot that the email went out at least appearing to come from CAMERA" Perhaps, but why did you not say so when you were reminded by me and others?
"Of course for all one knows it's possible that it was a fraud perpetrated by the Electronic Intifada on CAMERA stationary" So now its a fraud, you just admitted that you joined this group and were emailed from a camera.org web address. See this quote from the email (page 3)

You will soon get via email an invitation to join a Google Group entitled Isra-pedia. Itis there that we'll discuss problematic Wikipedia pages, and how to improve them.

"except and unless they scan our private emails and determine guilt or innocence based on our leaked and private emails" So now its your real private emails, please make up your mind.
"Anyway, the call for an editing group at CAMERA went out very respectful of wiki" Not according to the emails, heres some quotes.

This encyclopedia is intended to be written and edited by individuals -not by groups -- and that's what we'll do. At the same time, by having discussions within our group, we can learn about, discuss, and figure out how to overcome the challenges we each encounter as Wikipedia editors. There is no reason to advertise the fact that we have these group discussions

We will go to war after we have build our army, equiped it, trained right now we do not have the needed number of people who have enough Wikipedia expiraince and deep knowledge of Wikipedia policies to use for articulating out oint from a "policy" precpetive. We also don't have any admins. admins can "close" a vote and declare a result. (Not as stright forward as it seems. I know alefty admin who wait until his bodies vote and close the vote soon after ) so please if you want to win this war help us build out army. let's not just rush in and achieve nothing or abit more than nothing.

"The subversive part had already been assumed by most editors on this wikilobby page and by the time I weighed in, they had already feathered and tarred Zeg, claiming he was Gilead or Israguy or someone at this list, and an evil being." No i read the evidence (the emails) from start to finish, then decided it was a subversive group. Also Zeg(sic) (leave it out its a three letter name no-one buys your so unfamiliar with it you can't spell it) was proved to be Israguy.
"First of all, the originating letter from CAMERA said nothing about 'secret'-- It merely said not to forward to the media" No see the quote above it says don't mention the group to other editors, that is Secret.
"Infiltration" is simply used along with "secret" to put a sinister spin on an innocent enterprise" See the quotes about going to war etc.
"...to take over Wikipedia administrative structures 'to ensure these changes go either undetected or unchallenged." This quote says it all. No its up to you Arbitrators to protect wikipedia. (Hypnosadist) 18:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CAMERA

Thanks for letting me know. Jayjg (talk) 00:05, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I haven't really followed the issue that closely, but from what I've seen on Wikipedia, the group didn't actually do very much, aside from sending around various e-mails. Nevertheless, EI's spin is being accepted as fact, and a witch-hunt has ensued, along with some pretty hysterical rhetoric, and various other panicky responses, many amusing or sad depending on your perspective (the ritual marking of any article mentioned on the list was a particularly absurd touch). And, as was to be expected, several of Zeq's ideological foes were all hypocritically outdoing themselves with self-righteous comments, ignoring the fact that they do exactly what that CAMERA list was allegedly intended to do, but never actually did - tag-teaming and POVing various I-P related articles, particularly ones edited by Zeq or Jaakobou. All-in-all, a sorry mess from start to finish; let's hope the ArbCom can sort it out. Jayjg (talk) 00:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding your change of heart.....

If I may ask, what caused you to change your mind in regards to that "Wiki Lobby" template? I believe that the risk of abuse of the template, while real, is low. Evidently, you no longer believe that (and that's assuming that you, in fact, did believe that). The reason that I'm asking you this is that I'm trying to keep a genuinely open mind -- which I must admit is pretty difficult to do right now.
--NBahn (talk) 03:19, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

See the sanity check from Jayjg above(check his talk page for my reply), after not being called a racist for a few hours it seems to me that the template will do more harm than good and i may have based my decision on how hurt i felt with all the accusations flying about. (Hypnosadist) 03:30, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding MickMacNee

This person is really, really, really irritating the hell out of me at the CAMERA article. It's almost as though the guy is deliberately trying to minimize as much as possible the activities that CAMERA has been involved in. Thank you for putting that information back up that both USDOJ and MickMacNee seem hellbent on deleting. I have no idea exactly how long that that material will remain posted.
--NBahn (talk) 00:53, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Personal info

Hi. Regarding your last mesage to ChrisO's page, I would think that somneone's father's name would also be considered personal information. Just a heads up, thanks! -- Avi (talk) 07:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Maybe, but I don't think we should be doing scammers and stalkers any favors . I think that is something better handled by off-wiki e-mails, personally. -- Avi (talk) 07:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Great, although I believe they requested oversight, as opposed to oversighting it themselves, as there are about 12-15 people in all wiki who have oversight privs. Regardless, thank you for the update! -- Avi (talk) 12:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CAMERA lobbying

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CAMERA lobbying/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CAMERA lobbying/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Rlevse • Talk • 22:43, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Hello and thanks for you message. I tried to add it to the arb.com page, but I was always logged out at the page. Have no idea why. And I don´t feel like posting my IP. However, if you, or anybody else feel like posting the following for me, feel free to do so:

[edit] Evidence presented by {Huldra}

[edit] A case study

The one editor that I know is Zeq, and he has apparently written the following:

  • Every time you see a Hamas person makes an outragous statements (like Jews came from apes or kill the jews) you write a small article about that peroson (google his name to find more ) and bring the quote from memri. why doing all that ? because google is wikipedia friend - 3 days after you created the article google the person's name again and voila your article will be the #1 in google for that name.

Now, take a look at the article Muslim Association of Sweden, started by Zeq on 28 April 2006. First; notice that it is indeed #1 when you google for the name. Secondly, I remember the story well, it dominated the news in Scandinavia (where I am) for....a whole afternoon, April 28 2006, before it was "killed off".

The news/outrage was that the Muslim Association apparently demanded special laws for Muslims in Sweden. The story was "killed" when it turned out that it was "only" the leader who had made this suggestion (in a letter) *without* support from the members. And all other Muslim organisations, including the umbrella organisation, the Muslim Council of Sweden, distanced themselves from the letter. In the Swedish article, http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sveriges_muslimska_förbund, it states that that the leader was forced to withdraw his proposal as members of his own association went against it. (Based on this ref: [7]). But no such information on the English WP! Even though, when you look at the refs in English there is clearly inf. that all other Swedish Muslims (except his wife!) disagreed with him. And now the case, I assume partly based on the WP article, lives happily ever after in the blog-sphere, and is used as an example of the danger Islam is to Western countries.

[edit] Wikipedians for Palestine

Regarding Wikipedians for Palestine; I went over there to look, and somebody has updated the page there. I´m copying it here:

In light of the recent CAMERA/Isra-pedia scandal [] and seeing that Dajudem/Juanita wants to compare this group to the CAMERA/Isra-pedia effort she was involved in let us point out some key differences:

  • 1. This group never recruited neophytes to edit Wikipedia; only editors already in "good standing" were allowed to join.
  • 2. Unlike the Isra-pedia group, the existence of this group has never been hidden. It has always been public and purposely so (Yahoo does permit "unlisted" groups).
  • 3. Unlike the Isra-pedia effort, this group has always been explicitly committed to NPOV.
  • 4. This group has always been independent and never bankrolled and backed by any organization, let alone one as well staffed and funded as CAMERA.
  • 5. This last point may help explain why Isra-pedia had more message traffic in one week than this group had in the last seven months.

Regards, Huldra (talk) 09:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)

The April 2008 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) 01:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Please disengage

Hypnosadist, comments like this are absolutely not helpful. Please disengage from this issue, except in the unlikely case you still have some new factual information that the arbs actually need to review the bans and that hasn't been explained already. There's been far, far, far too much talk about this issue. Let the banned users have the last word if they must and please just step aside. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Hypnosadist--
While it is perfectly true that I agree with User:Future Perfect at Sunrise about the desirability to let the offenders have the last word, I would like you to know that I also agree with the sentiments that you expressed in your posting.
--NBahn (talk) 09:37, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Um, about that quote...

...that you highlight here. I can't find it there.
--NBahn (talk) 14:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't get to caught up in the "Race Card" thing. Atleast Dajudem seems to find the whole matter funny by complaining of "'persecutors' lol".--69.210.8.93 (talk) 16:26, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mediation Cabel - International reaction to fitna

User:Prom3th3an/notice

Please go to this page and state your acceptance (if you accept) we will be dsicussing everything on that page Prom3th3an (talk) 03:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mediation - Notify

Reminder: Please check the mediation page RE International reaction to Fitna on a reguler basis Prom3th3an (talk) 03:38, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)

The May 2008 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) 00:51, 3 June 2008 (UTC)