User talk:Jaakobou

edit count | edit summary usage Sunday 1 December 07:30 UTC Welcome to Jaakobou's talk page. Please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~). Place comments that start a new topic at the bottom of the page and give them ==A descriptive header==. If you're new to Wikipedia, please see Welcome to Wikipedia and frequently asked questions. Talk page guidelines Please respect Etiquette, assume good faith and try to be be polite.

• notes

Stuff I'm reading:

Wilayah Sanjak Medina Caliphate Iudaea Province - Judean Mountains Damour massacre Muhammad Ali Pasha Greater Syria Hamlet Merneptah Stele Reporters Without Borders Hama massacre Tadmor Prison May Laws Hashomer List of ethnic slurs Hurva Synagogue Arab Revolt Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Mecca Ali bin Hussein House of Saud

Syrian Jews Revolt in the Vendée Cairo Geniza United Monarchy Unitarian Universalism Karantina massacre Damascus Protocol Bilad al-Sham Constitution of Medina Indian mathematics Carmen Sandiego Ahmad Shukeiri Iraq Dujail Massacre Halabja poison gas attack 1991 massacre List of fallacies

User page updates

Hi, I've copied your new barnstar to your user page. Not sure where you want the DYK to go; please advise. I know it bites to get blocked, but please treat this the way it's meant to work: as a break for reflection and a chance to gain better perspective, and to make adjustments. Meanwhile I'm looking forward to your next new article. Keep your chin up. Durova^Charge! 14:24, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'll be making the adjustments. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 05:32, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

You emailed me

What's up Jaakobou? I haven't been on Wikipedia for awhile. You wanted to talk to me? мirаgeinred سَراب ٭ (talk) 16:03, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

This is a bit complex to explain. Mail me back if you can. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 05:33, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for looking into it

You may find these pages to be useful as they document the actions of the previous sock puppets. [1] [2] [3]

The sock puppet insists on trying to mention my personal information as well, note the edit comment. [4] Most of these following edits are removed by Oversight [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] There are a few more examples as well if you need them? Fnagaton 19:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, it doesn't look good for Multiplexor, but I'm trying to get to the bottom of this rather than just promote a block which will result in more and more socks. I'll wait a bit to see if he gives a proper response on his user page. Regardless of his response, I'm fairly certain Dmcdevit will "fix" this as soon as he's back on though so I wouldn't stress over this if I were you.

Cheers, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 19:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I hope you find these other links helpful Wikipedia:Abuse reports/217.87.x.x and User:Fnagaton/SarenneSockPuppetReport. Unfortunately the modus operadni of this user is to switch to multiple new accounts when one becomes blocked, or to use Tor or hop around the now range blocked 217.87.x.x range of IPs.Fnagaton 20:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Fnagaton,

Mind my asking, but can you clarify on what you believe was the trigger for the initial personal attack and what you believe might be possible solutions for diffusing the situation. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 20:16, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

The user has been blocked multiple times over a long period and still keeps on inventing new accounts and ways to avoid the block. Looking at the first two edits [13] [14] that have "rvv" comments then the next two edits about reporting and "my friends" there is definite history with the sock so I wouldn't like to guess what goes on in some people's minds when they insist on being this disruptive to Wikipedia. Fnagaton 20:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Fnagaton,

Multiplexor has just stated "I don't intend to mention his realname."

Is this enough to diffuse the situation or was there anything more that must be resolved?

With respect, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 21:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for trying to sort this out Jaakobou, but given that another edit appeared with my personal information, which was removed by Oversight, the user has been blocked [15]. Fnagaton 07:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jaakobou&diff=prev&oldid=212053710

Copied from [16]. (wikilink fixed) Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 07:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

	The Working Man's Barnstar
	Gratitude for the tireless efforts on the Wiki Page of CMKC. Especially knowing how busy you were, you were still able to help out; for the gracious efforts, I thought the "working man's barnstar" was the most suitable. Yonigs (talk) 15:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Media coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict (May 14, 2008)

Per this diff and this reversion of Media coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict:

Regarding the use of "abduct" versus "capture"... While I agree with you that "abduct" is the most accurate descriptor, I think "capture" is an accurate and more neutral descriptor. I would rather not drag Media coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict into a long and drawn out edit war over "abducted", "taken hostage", or "taken prisoner of war", when the accurate and neutral term "capture" can as easily suffice. Since Media coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict wikilinks to Gilad Shalit, I will leave it to the editors of that article to decide the appropriate wording. Also, because of the wikilink, the additional sources are superfluous -- thanks, though, for adding them.

Good day and good luck with your edits. ← Michael Safyan ^(talk) 20:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I can't say I agree completely with the "capture" terminology since the word "abduct" is used by high quality neutral sources -- I used 2: International Herald Tribune and CNN -- plus it was already accepted by Pedrito as NPOV and a proper descriptive. However, this issue is not really the topic of the article so I'll let this go for now so not to distract from the development of the newly re-written article - Good work btw. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 20:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

5/15 DYK

On 15 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article CMKC Group, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Bedford 22:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Offense

Offesive comment diff, and explanation. (added Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 07:15, 20 May 2008 (UTC))

If you would like me to remove the comment that offended you, I am happy to, on the condition that both of us remove that whole exchange, since without my actual words all our back-and-forth will lack context anyway. At this stage it's just between us, really, and the discussion has gone off the topic of changing the name of the category. Let me know what you think, LamaLoLeshLa (talk) 06:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll think about it a little bit (I have to go out now anyways) and get back to you.

Cordially, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 07:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, sure. You can either strike your text with the <s>Text</s> tags (result text) or remove it completely and also remove the comments starting with "(offtopic comment to LamaLoLeshLa)".

apologies for the delayed response. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 08:27, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Done. Glad we could resolve this with respect. LamaLoLeshLa (talk) 18:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

PEA

I see you labelled the change from 'critiques' to 'denunciations' PEA. I don't see it that way. I think critiques is pretty weak - you can use it with a plan people are critical of, or a film people don't like - but these human rights org.s denounced Operation Defensive Shield. I'm feeling like this is getting personal. Is it?LamaLoLeshLa (talk) 06:31, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I can't say what it is that may have triggered this, but I certainly sensed that there was an issue when you've decided to make a personally directed comment to a discussion of mine from last year.[17] I wasn't sure on how to respond or if I should respond at all to the content part of your question, due to the nature of the question. Content disputes occur, and you should avoid carrying personal disputes across articles.

I assure you that there is nothing personal here, but I am a bit concerned regarding your recent misuse of sources, more specifically, the ElectronicIntifada.net edit[18] which I reverted.[19] If you have used this source on other locations, I request that you either find a WP:RS replacement or that you remove both the reference and the related materials.

If you want to continue this conversation, we can either go over it on the relevant article talk page or that you can e-mail me.

With respect, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 06:54, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually I have never used the Electronic Intifada as a source. I have been changing the ordering of many articles recently, so that they are more chronological and followable; I haven't added many of my own footnotes in the past few days of editing, so maybe you misconstrued my copy-pastes as new additions. Maybe in that case I copied from another article. But actually if I remember correctly, all I was trying to do in that case specifically was to add that it is referred to variously by different populations. I think you managed to keep my basic point in? And I was fine with that.

As an aside, I think Electronic Intifada varies- it depends on the author, but no, I don't tend to use it as a reliable source of historical data - it can however be valuable in terms of reflecting sentiments during a particular time... I wouldn't necessarily assume the worst if someone cites it, though I understand that it raises eyebrows. I have reservations about it as a source as well, depending on the article. LamaLoLeshLa (talk) 07:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I suggest you review WP:QS and also the attached diffs from my earlier comment. If you see this error being done by others, you should revert it. Let me know where you copy-pasted the Erekat text from,[20] it was a clear error that should be corrected. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 08:20, 20 May 2008 (UTC)