User talk:Nableezy/Archive 18

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

→

Archive 25

Infrastructure

You make a decent point. If you want to change it from "infrastructure" back to "govt buildings," I won't oppose. Please note however, that many Hamas "government" buildings housed weapons and munitions, as I'm sure you are aware. Best Regards--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 14:30, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

In connection with your revert, why go into such detail in the Lead when such matters are generally addressed in prose. Please consider my argument and consider self-revert or partial self-revert. Respectfully,--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 04:49, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I think that for the lead, it's sufficient to say that civilian targets were hit without going into detail for either side. Details in connection with this matter should be left in the prose. That's just my humble opinion.--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 20:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

My apologies. Please do what you feel is necessary to restore balance. I leave it to your capable hands. Respectfully,--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 21:00, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Is this better?--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 21:30, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

dr

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Nableezy regarding personal attacks and illegitimate reverts. The discussion is about the topic File:Blue Line. Thank you. --DrorK (talk) 08:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Aw! F***it!

There I was, sneaking back from retirement, apparently for the encyclopedia's good, but only to have a proper round number to formally exit on, and find I've overshot the mark by 2, meaning another 998 edits are required to fit my mathematically dramatic exit! Can one revert back history to get to 14,000?Nishidani (talk) 16:01, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

I got you, but we have to delete the steiner talk page. nableezy - 16:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually, that wont help. Right now you are at 13,953 live edits and 53 deleted edits. The counter you are looking at includes the deleted ones. I think you just have to keep going to 15,000 now. Sorry. nableezy - 16:10, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey

I’m glad to see that you’ve decided to take your shoes off and stay a while. Maybe I’m being presumptive but it has been a while since you had a User Page. If you are, I’m happy for you. To be honest, I think I’m going to stay away from IP stuff at least for a while. I had dipped my toe into it just at the Gaza War article but I put my whole foot in at talk:Israel. Between that and Gaza War being as bad as ever I think I’ve come to realize that the IP problem is just unworkable. I think it is solvable but as long as these editors are just left to work it out among themselves, they never will. Apart from one or two decent editors, I think most of them really don’t care about writing an article that is reflective of multiple viewpoints or including anything they don’t strongly believe themselves. It’s a shame.

I’ve enjoyed working with you and some of the other editors as well. That’s probably the only thing that kept me around this long and the only thing that makes me think I might eventually come back. I hope you keep it up though. I’d have said you were one of the good few just to be polite but I happen to believe it too.

I’ll probably be back but I’m just fed up for now. And how can I waste time on that when there’s Olympic curling just outside my door? I see the US is down 2-0 to Switzerland in the second end. But they have the hammer of course. Very exciting. --JGGardiner (talk) 22:42, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

It is not solvable. Especially when the people who should be doing the editing in the area (the ones with no emotional attachment) cant deal with the bullshit. But I do understand, it aint worth it. It aint worth it for me either though. What the fuck is a curling though? Did you know the one thing I look forward to in the Winter Olympics (the hockey, much to my shame) is only on cable out here? All these dudely pretenda-sports on all the time, but hockey is not top dog. Shameful, deeply shameful. nableezy - 00:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, get stuffed, both of you. Winter isn't for sport. It's for moods and icy viewing and meditations on mortality, esp. after one viewed Nodar Kumaritashvili's tragic death. The evanescence of youth, amid the snows makes one think of

A.E. Housman,

Loveliest of trees, the cherry now

Is hung with bloom along the bough,

And stands about the woodland ride

Wearing white for Eastertide.

Now, of my threescore years and ten,

Twenty will not come again,

And take from seventy springs a score,

It only leaves me fifty more.

And since to look at things in bloom

Fifty springs are little room,

About the woodlands I will go

To see the cherry hung with snow.

You're both right of course. But keeping an eye on one or two pages, or reading in the meanwhile Finkelstein's new book, just out, on that topic, is well-invested tuppence if, in the future, one does return. Best wishes to you both. Nishidani (talk) 11:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Civility

Hi nableezy, It's important to remain civil when dealing with other editors, even in edit summaries. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 23:09, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but that was the only thing that came into my head as a proper response. Next time Ill leave the summary blank. nableezy - 23:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Good idea. If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 23:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Omar Sharif

Hi Nableezy. I was actually not checking your contributions this time but you came up twice on my watchlist. I didn't want to chime in at the noticeboards since it boarders on wikistalking and I don't want to come across as trying to influence a discussion that I'm not part of. So my two cents: Wikipedia:Verifiability is important as you pointed out. However, you may be ignoring Wikipedia:Verifiability#Access to sources. Although a transcript would be appreciated for Template:Cite episode I am under the impression that it is not a necessity. If Arab Cowboy (that part was stalkerish) or Cleo need to give more details so the reader can track it down (email, phone call, movie rental, extra extra googling, or whatever) it should be considered. It is also a BLP which requires even more caution. If the guy can be verified as not saying it is so then it really needs to be spelled out in the article ("x has been reported. Dude says y"Cptnono (talk) 07:56, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I am not ignoring that. There has to be a physical record that about this interview, something being shown on TV once is not enough, especially given the number of sources that contradict this supposed interview. And, since you brought it up, the policy says Verifiability, in this context, means that anyone should be able to check the sources to verify that material in a Wikipedia article has already been published by a reliable source. That is not possible by just saying Sharif said something on TV once. nableezy - 07:58, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

"Ignore" was incorrectly worded then. If you can call the station and order a transcript it is verifiable. You need more info from the editor(s) before that is even possible though.Cptnono (talk) 08:40, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Arabic font

Hey Nableezy. I was wondering if you could do me a big favour. The computer I'm working on doesn't have Arabic font and I am starting a new article on Mujir al-Din al-'Ulaymi and would like to have his name in Arabic characters. His full name is 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Muhammad al-'Ulaymi, but he was commonly called Mujir al-Din, Mujir al-Din al-'Ulaymi, or Mujir al-Din al-Hanbali. Can you help me out? Thanks. Tiamut^talk 18:37, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I also forget to ask you if you could send me a copy of this article [1] since you have JSTOR access (if the offer to punk articles from you still stands that is) :) Tiamut^talk 18:37, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

sent, when I get home will get the Arabic for you. nableezy - 19:06, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Shukran jazeelan, sadiqi. Tiamut^talk 19:09, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

عيناي nableezy - 19:34, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Tislim toumak. What do you think about adding al-Hanbali to his name (both in English and Arabic)? I'm not sure how to address his name. A lot of the initial sources I saw simply called him Mujir al-Din (without al-'Ulaymi or al-Hanbali). I then noticed some calling him Mujir al-Din al-'Ulaymi, and others replacing al-'Ulaymi with al-Hanbali. If in Arabic they use both, maybe we should use both here too. The reason I didn't go with simply Mujir al-Din is that there seem to others too and I wanted to disambiguate him from others (should they ever have wiki articles of their own one day).

Another favour to ask though ... could you add his name in Arabic in the "Name and background" section after his full name? Shukran ikteer ya akhi. Tiamut^talk 22:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I dont know, Ill look around, but at first glance it seems that al-Hanbali is more of a title than part of the name. nableezy - 23:26, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

link

what do you think about this article. [2] thanks in advance. Cryptonio (talk) 17:42, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I dont know, what would you use it for? nableezy - 17:46, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

well, there is a shortage of info, in english at least, to input about Pales military actions during the war. we could agree that it was very 'limited'(absent rockets) and that the section should rather be a short one? narrative: shock and awe had a great deal of effect and it really then became survival(more discreet than usual)? Cryptonio (talk) 21:20, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I dont know, do what you want. Im only picking a few things in that article to waste my time on, this aint one of them. Sorry. nableezy - 21:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, could this article help with compliance? Cryptonio (talk) 21:27, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Compliance with what? nableezy - 21:28, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

well the article seems a bit anecdotal, editorial even. does it read to you like any other press release? Cryptonio (talk) 21:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Amira Hass is a reporter, a damn good one at that, and this is a news article, not an editorial. nableezy - 21:56, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I'll quote you on that. thanks Cryptonio (talk) 05:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Rather surprising article from Amira, I expected worse. However, I think it should be treated with extreme caution, as many descriptions there are just reflections of the witnesses. --Sceptic from Ashdod ^(talk) 16:52, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Of course, she is reporting what others have said, she isnt saying it is true. nableezy - 16:55, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

pan-arabism, the Lanternix-mix

What that article is missing is the line "He has the hindquarters, legs, and horns of a goat, in the same manner as a faun." from the Pan article. Sean.hoyland - talk 04:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

hahaha. thank you, thank you very much. nableezy - 04:51, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

primary/secondary source

lost u somewhere. just out of curiosity - ok, Goldstone report is secondary sourse. then what? it is not transformed somehow to RS, isn't it? the same about Cordesman report, right? --Sceptic from Ashdod ^(talk) 11:44, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

We can go to the RS/N for both of them. But I think for the information in each they are a reliable source, for the judgments in them they are primary sources that should be attributed. But we can work that out at the RS/N. nableezy - 16:26, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

wait a second, so if Cordesman says that say Israel delivered 500 t of humanitarian aid daily, you take this for granted? --Sceptic from Ashdod ^(talk) 16:48, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I dont, Wikipedia does. nableezy - 16:54, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, but I still disagree. As long as Cordesman's or Goldstone's qualification as RSs is not established, the figures they reproduce cannot be stated as fact but requires attribution, either to their source (if sourced) or to them directly. --Sceptic from Ashdod ^(talk) 04:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Reverting

Your enthusiasm about reverting edits is really a bit too much. First of all, you discarded several corrections by your over enthusiasm. Secondly, there is no consensus on the talk page, hence the change from "disputed" to "occupied" is illegitimate. I hope that's the end of the story. DrorK (talk) 18:41, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Drork, no I did not, the only changes I made were to "occupied" and to your change of the district field in the infobox. The Template requires that district name be lowercase, "jerusalem" is a set field and when you made it "Jerusalem" you can see that the article shows nothing in the "District" field. I left in everything else. nableezy - 18:45, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

You have been reported here

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

no mas

---

Please make your comments in the aforementioned page. DrorK (talk) 07:49, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi nableezy. I think you know that a comment like this is inappropriate. Please strike it, and don't make similar comments in the future. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 08:57, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Sadly, I cannot oblige. Funny is funny, and that was funny. And somebody who thinks that "everybody" agrees with them really should consult a psychiatrist. I am not even that far gone as to think that "everybody" agrees with me. nableezy - 01:43, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid that would be too little too late. I won't regard it as an apology. DrorK (talk) 10:20, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Pardon my french Drork, but you are acting like quite the WP:DICK. Might I suggest you stay far away from Nableezy (and please add me to that request too). Thanks. Tiamut^talk 10:32, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Frankly, DrorK, I don't care whether you regard it as an apology. I have a strong suspicion you'd rather continue to nurse a grudge than accept an apology from nableezy. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 10:59, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I wonder when Harlan would join this. Is he on vacation? DrorK (talk) 11:53, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

If you want to say something say it, dont try being cute. Dont worry, I wont be easily offended at whatever it is you want to say. And even if I were, Im a grown man, I wont go crying that you said something bad about me. nableezy - 01:43, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Malik's advice is the first time I've seen one of Nab's colleagues watch out for him. Nableezy is a proven wild cannon and I am really surprised his friends don't care to try to reign him in, instead back him up in his little skirmishes. His four -> two month ban could easily have been avoided if his 'friends' has tried to calm him down. A bit unfortunate, because he has shown (at least on one article) that he can be a serious contributing editor. --Shuki (talk) 00:28, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Shuki, do you think calling somebody a "wild canon" (fyi, in English it is "loose canon") is civil? I only ask because you were so easily offended at my "incivility", I would have thought that you would take care to remain civil. Good thing I dont take that seriously, you could be looking at a report at WQA (oh the humanity!). nableezy - 01:43, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Shuki, you really should read before you write. See #Civility higher up this page. BTW, as a Wikipedia editor, you're one of nableezy's "colleagues" too. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 01:08, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Not really, I should just be more specific. You are the only one watching out for him and that is sad. In fact, as a colleague on WP, I have also warned him a few times, but he usually strikes my comments from his talk page. A confession: I have many more times wanted to warn him about going to far on skirmishes with others, but I just click on, but I could not care less about editors who do not care. Oh, if you really want to be accurate, many people have been trying to calm him down, but their guilt is that they are not part of his 'posse'.--Shuki (talk) 01:29, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I think you know what it is I want to say right now, in fact I think you are trying to get me to say it. But I'll just say it out loud. nableezy - 01:43, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Why was this section closed before I could make an unhelpful comment ? Seems unfair. I'm sure I could have come up with something about the importance of hard hats or wearing a cycling helmet while editing, quality stuff. Oh well. Sean.hoyland - talk 17:46, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I wish

I were a 'wild cannon' that had to be reigned in, presumably one fallen from the Ramparts belonging to a kingdom under siege, and the regnant authority, looking down, like a forlorn Hamletic ghost, from the merlons and crenels, cried out 'my kingdom for that cannon', 'my reign for that loose cannon', etc. God! This place is getting fucking tiresome, all tweak and wiggle and niggle in a dingbat parade of f*witted knowalls.Nishidani (talk) 17:28, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

What the fuck have you gotten yourself in to? From Shakespeare to San Fransisco bath houses, seems like you took a wrong turn somewhere. nableezy - 18:32, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Homesickness leads to distractions. I long to hear a recording of Darwish’s 'Ābirūn fī kalām 'ābir Nishidani (talk) 20:46, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Long no more, just check your mail. nableezy - 22:24, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I love that song ...

The lyrics make me cry and smile at the same time. It makes me think of my many older relatives, some of whom died in exile, always yearning to have returned, even if just to breathe in the smell of the land they loved so much. Thanks for that Nableezy. Tiamut^talk 19:37, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I called my dad and asked him why he had me listen to the 3 hour long songs she made instead of that one, would have been a much bigger Um Kalthoum fan if he had this one playing instead. nableezy - 19:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

lol ... do you the music of George Qormouz? Ana ismi shaabu filastin [3]? That's some really good stuff too. Ha also has one about Egypt, but I forget the name of it. I think you'd love it though so try to find it. Tiamut^talk 20:03, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Time to disengage

A piece of advice, stop thinking out loud because you are clearly being baited right now! Please stop all your replies to them (including on ANI, WQA and others), learn to disengage (yes, you are allowed to do that if you don't feel comfortable dealing with them!) and start to focus on the factual issues on them articles... let your persistence for improving them speak for yourself, rather than to be baited time and again into silly arguments after silly arguments. You have a choice, but what you are doing is attracting more of those same negative people/comments whom/which you've come to loathe. Pardon me but can't you just simply ignore them and concentrate on what you do best? Assuming that you are not here to destroy the articles... so can we have some agreement on that? Sincere regards. (PS: Could I interest you to read up on WP:OWB, as it pretty much sums up things around here, if you read hard enough.) --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 04:47, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello

I saw your message on the RS noticebaord and left my opinion on Talk:Pan-Arabism#Current_sources. I agree with your analysis, sources are poor and there is an outright push to make arabs look like goose-stepping anti-semites. As a noob editor I'm afraid my opinion/judgement probably counts for little, so I don't feel confident enough to get drawn into controversial issues. On a similar issue, I raised a query myself on RS about a source being used on Nag Hammadi massacre [4], perhaps you could give me your experienced opinion please? Regards Glumboot (talk) 17:35, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll take a look, but probably later tonight. A bit busy right now. nableezy - 17:47, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey

I have talked with the arb drafter of the Asmahan arbitration case User:Wizardman, I explained to him that when I previously got blocked when I asked you to get involved, was because of a misunderstanding. He has now told me that a third part is needed and that I am allowed to ask a neutral person to take a look at points of correction I have posted at the talkpage. I told him that I was either gonna ask you again or someone else.

I have now asked both Tiamut and Malik Shabazz, but they have both declined, so are you interested in taking a look at the points of correction I have posted at the talkpage? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 23:49, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

No. nableezy - 20:24, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the tip! Regards. --nsaum75^{¡שיחת!‎} 20:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem, take a look at WP:SUBST for more info. nableezy - 20:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for List of Jewish Nobel Prize Winners

On March 10, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of Jewish Nobel laureates, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

I included two other users and you in my DYK nomination, but a silly bot gave credit to me only. So, here it is. You were the first one to come to my rescue with so much hated references :) Thanks for your help! --Mbz1 (talk) 14:37, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much, but I really dont deserve this. nableezy - 17:29, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

there goes your street cred.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 00:27, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

That wasnt my concern here (and if you mean what I think you mean, been gone for a while now). I just didnt do anything on that list, the only edits I made were this and this. That doesnt merit any type of recognition. nableezy - 00:40, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Sinai map

I made a map Template:Location map Egypt Sinai. I though it might come in handy as a locator for some ancient site or location you might be working on... P.S. any idea why Tiamut has stopped speaking to me? ‡ Himalayan ‡ ^ΨMonastery 17:38, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Nicely done, and I hadnt noticed that she had and dont know why if she has. nableezy - 19:23, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tapuah junction stabbing

This afd in which you participated is being discussed at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 March 12.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 00:01, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Shady as hell, I should have been the first person you notified. nableezy - 01:02, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Jordanian annexed territory

good day to you, Khaled Mashal was indeed born in a territory which was then considered by Jordan as Jordanian for all purposes including identity, you should accept this legal reality and reinstate your deletion, thanks, --Hope&Act3! (talk) 15:41, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Can you help?

Huldra asked me about this article [5]. If you have access to it, I'd love to have a copy to start a new article on Agil Aga. Inshallah you are tamam, sadiq. Tiamut^talk 21:08, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

You have to be more forceful, next time say "get this article right now goddamit!". Sent. nableezy - 21:14, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

lol ... Yislamu ikteer. Tiamut^talk 21:17, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

عيناي nableezy - 21:23, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, for some reason I imagine you know how to fix images? Working/collecting sources on Agil Aga -we have a picture, however, he looks "the wrong way"! Is it possible to get the mirror image, so that mr. Aga faces his article ---and not like now, look away from it? Cheers, Huldra (talk) 00:42, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

File:Holy Land 140 mirror.jpg. Let me know if there is anything else you need. nableezy - 20:50, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Huldra (talk) 21:41, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Cptnono

collapse unintelligible babbling
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
originally started at User talk:Cptnono I dont know why it is you feel the need to comment on everything even tangentially related to me, but please stop. nableezy - 14:00, 16 March 2010 (UTC) A noticeboard is for community participation and I feel that sometimes you disrupt the collaborative process. As I have said before, you and a few others work very well together but those who disagree with you do not do the same. When you start being a team player I'll stop commenting.23:23, 16 March 2010 (UTC) Keep it in one place. That isnt that type of noticeboard. Start being a team player? How about you stop being a dick and involving yourself in every little thing that has to do with me? That topic has nothing to do with you and the only way you notice what happens there is by checking my contribs. Stop doing that. I am not asking anymore; if you continue involving yourself in discussions that you have never shown an interest in I will be asking an admin to stop you. nableezy - 23:29, 16 March 2010 (UTC) You also aren't the only reason which shouldn't be a blow to your ego. There are several editors and several noticeboards that peak m y interest when they show up on the wachlist. This one was actually only partially related to you. And I didn't even say your name. SO did you read the above or not. Stop buggin me about it since I am not doing anything wrong.Cptnono (talk) 23:30, 16 March 2010 (UTC) Again, keep it in one place. And yes you are doing something wrong, so I will repeat myself. If you continue involving yourself in discussions that you have never shown an interest in I will be asking an admin to stop you. Bye. nableezy - 23:33, 16 March 2010 (UTC) And if you show up on my watchlist and someone is being accused of something on a notcieboard I'm going to say something. I don't check your contributions that often actually. Alot of it is overlap from looking more into the I-P and Muslim conflicts. For example I had happened to be reading the paper during happy hour and read a long story about dude who got assassinated. I jumped on WIkipedia a few hours later and saw that Tiamut had been working on the article. I thought it sucked. Instead of making any changes I mentioned one thing for improvement on the talk page. Is that harassing her? No. I would say I was being too cautious. Another example is when you brought dude to a noticeboard for what appeared to be your removal of good sources I mentioned it on your talk page because I didn't want to get too involved. He was blocked so someone had to make the argument since it appeared to be a god one. I'm not following you. I am following the topic and you are continually involved in the topic and its noticeboards. If you don;t want me around stop putting yourself in those positions. So stop assuming the worst. In fact, your last message is treading the line on incivility so watch it.Cptnono (talk) 23:41, 16 March 2010 (UTC) Furthermore, you swoop in all the time at the request of your friends. How is this any different?Cptnono (talk) 23:42, 16 March 2010 (UTC) And the best point I can make to you is that I did not file an edit warring complaint against you. I said one thing on a noticeboard If i was harassing you I would have drug you over there myself. Cptnono (talk) 23:46, 16 March 2010 (UTC) First off, you are simply lying. Name one time that I have "swoop[ed] in at the request of [my] friends." I wont call you a "dirty liar" for that, but that is a lie. Next. Dont check my contribs period. Not every once in a while, not when you are bored, just dont. Finally, you have absolutely no idea what a good source is, so your opinion on whether or not I was removing a "good source" is something I do not care about nor wish to be informed of. I dont know what you think I think of you, but if it includes caring about your opinion on just about any topic you are mistaken. I will deal with you where I have to, but besides that I would rather just avoid you as I am not entirely sure if I possess the willpower to not tell you what I think of you. So, for the last time, do not continue involving yourself in discussions that you have never shown an interest in or I will be asking an admin to stop you. Bye. nableezy - 23:56, 16 March 2010 (UTC) I'm not going to pull the diffs but your talk page makes it pretty clear. The continuous requests for sock investigations is an example. Why are you harassing Norcal? Well that is how I feel about you. I was involved in a civility discussion with you and feel justified in commenting when you keep it up just like you feel justified in stopping a sockpuppet. You also should stop bringing up the dirty liar thing since I have bent over backwards t apologize and manned up for being a dickhead. And just for fun, I have voted to keep an article that was at AfD that you happened to be also on the discussion. That certainly is the exact opposite of harassing you. And one more time you can't tell me not to do anything (well you can but I am free to ignore it). I've been pretty civil abou it. Sometimes we will bump into each other. I am not out to get you so stop worrying about it. Cptnono (talk) 00:21, 17 March 2010 (UTC) Why am I "harassing" NoCal? That has to be one of the single dumbest things I have read on Wikipedia. I congratulate you on the accomplishment. Do you have any idea who NoCal is or what he has done here? If not, as I suspect, dont write about things of which you have no knowledge. nableezy - 00:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC) And you cant bullshit on not following me. With the Omar Sharif article (which in no way is in the "topic-area") you admitted to looking at my contribs. On the sock of NoCal, there is no way for you to have given that notification without having looked at my contribs. And pan-Arabism is also not in the "topic-area". I realize I will have to deal with you within a certain topic, but not everywhere else. There is no reason, none at all, for you to involve yourself in other disputes I may have. So dont. nableezy - 00:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC) I actually said on the Omar Sarif article that I saw it since it popped up more than once on the watchlist. Your memory is not correct on that one. And PanArabism again was a watchlist. And if you notice, I have edited more than just I-P in regards to the region so don't assume the worst. I actually find the concept of Pan_Arabism interesting but have made an effor tot not touch the article since you are so involved. Again, another point as to ho your accusation that I am harassing you is completely bogus. And in regards to your astonishment over me bringing up Norcal, that is my point. You are attempting to stop a sockpuppet when you see it and am trying to stop your incivility. It relates to a withdrawn request at AE. I have already explained it to you. It is a slap in the face to see you continue to be rude when I withdrew a request. So what's your problem? Why are you assuming the wrst? Why do you see the need to argue over this instead of AGF? Why did you write something completely incorrect up above? Chill out and stop.Cptnono (talk) 00:35, 17 March 2010 (UTC) bullshit. You said you checked my edits at Arab Cowboy's talk page, even calling it "stalkerish", and I would like to see you explain how that article got in your watchlist without first checking my contribs as I am sure it would be an entertaining story. And if that was in your watchlist and you supposedly want to stop incivility you might have said something one of the any number of times I have been called a brainwashed racist on that page. But that is not what you want to do. My "incivility" has nothing to do with you making that edit at the socks talk page, nor does it have anything to do with your comment at the EW noticeboard. Stop trying to bullshit me, you are not good enough at it. And what did I write that is "completely incorrect"? nableezy - 02:38, 17 March 2010 (UTC) (edit conflict)::Sticking my nose where it probably doesn't belong, but its been my experience that when Nableezy suspects something is "questionable" with an editor, he is usually right. I have great respect for his ability to pick out nuances in "new" editors behaviors and mannerisms. Anyhow, socks, regardless of "what side" the edit for, damage not only the articles they edit but the credibility of Wikipedia as a whole. While we must try to assume good faith, we must also be vigilant to ensure that our "good faith" its not taken advantage of. Regards --nsaum75¡שיחת!‎ 00:40, 17 March 2010 (UTC) And I am not a new editor. But I won;t tell you to mind your own business because people are free to chit chat. Thanks for making my point. And if Nableezy is feeling harassed right now it is because he brought it up. Feel free to blank this when ou are done throwing your accusations around dude.Cptnono (talk) 00:43, 17 March 2010 (UTC) I dont feel "harassed", Im not a lil kid. Some random person on the internet is annoying me. I would like to stop that annoyance, and if you do not voluntarily stop annoying me I will ask somebody to make you. nableezy - 02:38, 17 March 2010 (UTC) If you are not feeling harassed and I am not disrupting your ability to edit then there isn't a problem. I was annoyed that you even brought this up but I am not the one talking about needing admins. You are also working on a collaborative project and frequently drawing criticism from other editors. If you are annoyed you should change your editing habits or not edit at all. I for one will make a mention on a noticeboard not even saying your name whenever I want. It isn't all about you. Cptnono (talk) 04:58, 17 March 2010 (UTC) Except this is about me. Stop involving yourself where you are involving yourself in discussions that you have never shown an interest in or I will be asking an admin to stop you. That really is all I have to say to you. Bye. nableezy - 05:32, 17 March 2010 (UTC) No. You just assume I am following you. I have tons of talk pages and and articles on my watchlist. You also don;t know what interests I have. Stop thinking it is about you. You have called me a liar, assumed the worst of faith with accusations, and been harassing me with these comments. Cptnono (talk) 05:39, 17 March 2010 (UTC) I have not called you a liar, I have said you lied. And you did lie. Somebody asking me to look into possible sockpuppetry by a banned account with a history of harassing a number of editors is not "swoop[ing] in at the request of [my] friends." If thats all you got I still say that is a lie. And I am harassing you? By asking you to not look at my contribs and follow me around? Interesting. There is a reason I dont pay much attention to what you think, and that line of thinking is part of it. nableezy - 05:42, 17 March 2010 (UTC) Stop dancing. Refering to and calling someone a liar are the same thing. You also didn't call me a dick but refered to me as one earlier. I am not following you around. You are jumping to conclusions. You are also incredibly uncivil. Have I crossed the line once in this conversation? Reread your comments. I can't tell if you are attempting to bait me or are just that rude.Cptnono (talk) Im attempting to bait you? Im the one showing up in random places to annoy you? Theres that thinking process again. nableezy - 05:46, 17 March 2010 (UTC) I'm not showing up because of you. Get over yourself.Cptnono (talk) 05:47, 17 March 2010 (UTC) Really? So when you do this after I do this that isnt because of me. And when you write that you did, in a "stalkerish" manner, look through my contribs that isnt about me. Or when you say, in this very section discussing this very issue, that it isnt "all" about me, implying that it was at least partly about me, that has nothing to do with me. Try again. nableezy - 05:51, 17 March 2010 (UTC) I doubt anyone can see those as being inappropriate. And I have told you, there are going to be some circumstances where I do go out of my way to make sure you are not using the system with bad form. Those were not from looking at your contributions. Those were from seeing various things on talk pages. I call it due diligence. The admitting that I was trying not to be stalkerish was pretty good on my part actually. The only recent thing I have done that was disruptive was mocking your userpage. I thought it was funny but it was not cool on my part. I think it is easily counterbalanced with you admitting to using the contentious userbox as a dig at me. So two instances were we each crossed the line. I am actually proud of the diffs you mentioned. So chiming in on a noticeboard or an AfD that you happen to be involved with along with numerous other editors is not something I will feel bad for. We can keep on arguing about this but you are pulling at straws, dancing around, and coming across like you are only interested in making a point or saving face. You can also drop it and we can see what happens. I'll not check out your contributions to find ways to get you (unless you are at AE or a noticeboard and a case needs to be made) but don't expect me not to call you out when I see you doing something wrong on a noticeboard.Cptnono (talk) 05:59, 17 March 2010 (UTC) Really, what talk page did you see the SPI report on? Last time; stop involving yourself in discussions that you have never shown an interest in or I will be asking an admin to stop you. That really is all I have to say to you. Bye. Let me know if you need a definition for bye, you havent seemed to figure it out from the last few times I said it. nableezy - 06:02, 17 March 2010 (UTC) If you are going to ask questions in a veiled attempt at getting the last word in then I am going to answer. You and Tiamut often have discussions about socks. And I have shown in interest in various subjects throughout several topics so expect to see me again. If I am poking around the topic area and want to add a comment at Palestinian territories or something similar I will. I actually almost added info to Egyptian v Algeria. Just because you edit Egyptian articles does not mean I was going there for you. I watched a great documentary on carving up the Middle East the other day. I wasn't looking into the subject on Wikipeida because of you. I will admit that I am way more interested in the I-P conflict now because of what I have seen on Wikipedia but that is more than you. I won't go out of my way to give you a hard time just like I have not already. SO if you want me to go bye stop talking shit.Cptnono (talk) 06:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC) So Tiamut asks me to look into socks. What is your point? Sorry, that is a bit presumptuous, you may not actually have a point. Let me put it this final way. If I can demonstrate that you are continuing to follow me around I will ask that you be blocked. If you think that wont happen do whatever the fuck you want to. If you think that will then stop doing this. Bye. nableezy - 06:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC) Stop asking questions if you are done. I see you making mistakes on my watch list (yes you and Tiamut are both on there and I look if it peeks my interest. I know I am on yours). I actually do go out of my way not to edit with either of you though. I feel you should have given dude a heads up. And doing so did not cause any disruption. That was my point. So yeah, we'll see what happens. Cptnono (talk) 06:27, 17 March 2010 (UTC) I dont give a fuck about what you feel. For the last time, if you continue to involve yourself in discussions wholly unrelated to you, regardless of your feelings, I will be asking for somebody to make you stop. Bye. nableezy - 06:29, 17 March 2010 (UTC)