Hello, Abafied, 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 ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! John Vandenberg15:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, John, and many thanks for your welcome.
I'm still finding my way around the wiki format process and codes, so am not quite sure if this is the way to reply to you, or not. It looks as though I'll have to set up a user page at some point; this, I presume, is the user talk page.
Hi Abafied,
I can see you are new to wikipedia so I will be gentle with you :) The most important thing I have to tell you is that if you are going to make a number of changes to a page then it is not the wikipedia way to do it as a series of little edits one after another. What you might like to do instead is to make a copy of the page you are interested in editing in your sandbox. A sandbox is a wikipedia page which lets you make changes without affecting the actual article. Once you have done this you can edit away and then, once you are done, you can copy the new version to the actual page in one go. If you do a whole series of edits to the actual page it makes it very hard for others to keep up with what you have done and/or to make any changes which may need to be made to your edits. You might like to visit this page wikipedia sandbox which will explain all about sandboxes. That page also contains a link to a page which contains instructions about how to create your own user sandbox.
Morgan Leigh01:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks, Morgan. Yes, I'm new to wiki. editing. As the articles was so long and so many parts needed repositioning and re-categorising, I couldn't do it all within the one hour limit of the sandbox, or even within a day; it'll take quite a while. The limit of the sandbox is one hour, isn't it, or have I misunderstood wiki instructions? I don't want to be breaking rules, though... Abafied08:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Abafied, going through the history of this article, and the rewrite you have done, it seems to me that the article - that was once mostly accurate but in need of additional sourcing - has now become an article with more inaccuracies, a lot of Original Research, and almost no Sourcing at all. I hope that it can be improved. It almost seems that it would be better if the article were reverted.
Kwork, I didn't do a rewrite, but re-arranged the material, keeping the original sources and references, without deletion. I did add the short piece on Christian Kabbalah and moved the section on Kabbalistic literature to its own page.Abafied 20:33, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Wk1.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. After Midnight0001 04:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Many thanks. I've put a message on the Media copyright questions page, asking for help in tagging the image. abafied 02:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
abafied, as long as you have it sourced it is fine with me. Although I could not find it in the source you gave, I will take you at your word; and later add some other material to balance it. But the name of the article remains a problem, because (as far as I can find) the name "Toledano Tradition" is used by no one but Warren Kenton and his followers. While Warren Kenton's books are certainly notable, it is not possible to call them scholarly. It is really a sort of New Age Kabbalah. I think that either the article should be merged with the Warren Kenton article, or that the name should be changed. If the I don't have much time for bothering with that now, but the subject should be given some thought. An article like this should really have the Judaism template, but not as it now stands. I would rather do things through mutual agreement, and if I have my facts wrong let me know because I am just trying to do what is right, not force a point. I assume the same of you. Savlanoot. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 17:10, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
See my response on the Toledano Tradition page. abafied (talk) 22:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
.........................
Neoplatonic Influences in Kabbalah
In reponse to your deletions concerning Neoplatonism on the [[Toledano Tradition}} page. A copy of the comments and references below have been placed on the discussion page there.
I see that the sections referring to the connections between Neoplatonism and Kabbalah were removed by Malcolm Scosha , previously known as Kwork, on 12.2.08, even though they were referenced to the relevant articles in the "Jewish Encyclopedia 1906" on 11.2.08 as a result of a call for citation by him. Both the current "Encyclopedia Judaica, 2006" and the "Jewish Encyclopedia 1906" refer to Neoplatonism in the work of both ibn Pakuda and ibn Gabirol. The "Jewish Encyclopedia 1906" was the one used as a reference in the article on 11.2.08 as the "Encyclopedia Judaica" is not available online. To support the statements of ibn Gabirol's and ibn Pakuda's Neoplatonism, the relevant sections of the articles from both encyclopedias are quoted in full below. For further evidence of the influence of Neoplatonism on Kabbalah see the "Jewish Enclyclopedia, 1906" articles on "Cabala", "Emanation" and "Massekhet Atzilut"; also Gershom Scholem, "Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism", pp115ff and "The Origins of the Kabbalah, pp 316-320, 327-330, 363-364 and 389-390.
Neoplatonism in Kabbalah, and in the works of ibn Pakuda and ibn Gabirol, is attested to by more than one Jewish scholar, among them Broydé, Kohler, Gottheil, Wise and Friedlander, and so informed the Kabbalah of Provence and Spain in the Early Medieval Period, thus being an important strand in the development of Judaic mysticism of that era.
FFor modern references see "Neoplatonism and Jewish Thought", edited by Lenn E. Goodman, SUNY Press, 1992, posits how Platonism impacted Jewish thinking. Of particular interest on the general topic are two essays: "Self-Contraction of the Godhead in Kabbalistic Theology" by David Novak; "Jewish Kabbalah and Platonism in the Middle Ages and Renaissance" by Moshe Idel. On ibn Gabirol's Neoplatonism there are three articles by, respectively, John Dillon - "Solomon ibn Gabirol's Doctrine of Intelligible Matter", C.K. Mathis II - "Parallel Structures in the Metaphysics of Iamblichus and Ibn Gabirol" and Bernard McGinn - "Ibn Gabirol: Sage among the Schoolmen".
However, if there is scholarly evidence (not unsupported internet articles) that Neoplatonism had not entered Judaic mysticism by the Early Medieval period then those references need to be placed on this discussion page and further discussion needs to take place before deciding the best way forward for the article and before the deletion of sections of articles because inncurate information concerning the soures put up on 11.2.08 was cited as the reson for deletion. I strongly advise that the deletor reads the source articles and have placed this discussion on his own user discussion page.
For this reason, and until evidence to the contrary is forthcoming, I am reinstating the sections deleted on ibn Gabirol and ibn Pakuda, with, as per 11.2.08, references to the articles in the "Jewish Encyclopedia 1906," and including a gif which was also removed without any notification of the reasons why. abafied (talk) 10:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
1 "Encyclopaedia Judaica", ed. Fred Skolnik, pub. Thomson Gale, 2006 Article on Kabbalah, section concerning both ibn Pakuda and ibn Gabirol
"Extremism in ethical and religious behavior, which in the sayings and literature of the rabbis characterized the term "hasid" ("pious") as against "zaddik" ("righteous"), became the central norm of these new tendencies. They found their classical literary expression, first and foremost, in 11th-century Spain in "Hovot ha-Levavot" by *Bahya ibn Paquda which was originally written in Arabic. The material dealing with the life devoted to communion of the true "servant" - who is none other than the hasid yearning for the mystical life - is taken from Sufi sources and the author's intention was to produce an instructional manual of Jewish pietism which culminated in a mystical intent. A Hebrew translation of the "Hovot ha-Levavot" was made on the initiative of *Abraham b. David of Posquières and the early circle of kabbalists in Lunel. The book's great success, especially in Hebrew, shows how much it answered the religious needs of people even beyond the confines of the Kabbalah.
The obvious connection with talmudic tradition, which served as the point of departure for explanations of a remarkable spiritual intent, was a distinguishing feature in works of this kind, which also clearly reveal neoplatonic philosophical elements. Such elements facilitated the creation of formulations of a mystical character, and this philosophy became one of its most powerful means of expression.
. Several of the poems of Solomon ibn *Gabirol, Bahya's older contemporary, evidence this trend toward a mystical spirituality, and it is expressed particularly in the concepts of his great philosophical work, "Mekor Hayyim," which is completely saturated with the spirit of neoplatonism. The extent to which his poems reflect individual mystical experiences is controversial (cf. the view of Abraham Parnes, "Mi-Bein la-Ma'arakhot" (1951), 138-61). In Spain, after a century or more, these tendencies intermingled with the emerging Kabbalah, where traces of Gabirol may be seen here and there, especially in the writings of Isaac b. *Latif."
2 From the "Jewish Encyclopedia 1906; pub. Funk and Wignals, 1906, article on ibn Gabirol by Richard Gottheil, Stephen S. Wise, Michael Friedländer, 9bn Gabirol, article heading, " Restorer of Neoplatonism."
"Restorer of Neoplatonism.
Gabirol was the first teacher of Neoplatonism in Europe. He essayed again the part played by Philo. Philo had served as the intermediary between Hellenic, especially Platonic, philosophy and the Oriental world. He had Orientalized European philosophy and prepared the way for its Christianization. A thousand years later Gabirol Occidentalized Greco-Arabic philosophy and restored it to Europe. Strangely enough, the philosophical teachings of Philo and Gabirol were alike ignored by their fellow Jews; and the parallel may be extended by adding that Philo and Gabirol alike exercised a very considerable influence in extra-Jewish circles: Philo upon primitive Christianity, and Gabirol upon the scholasticism of medieval Christianity. Gabirol's service, in common with that of other Arabic and Jewish philosophers, in bringing the philosophy of Greece under the shelter of the Christian Church, was but a return for the service of the earlier Christian scholars, who had translated the chief works of Greek philosophy into Syriac and Arabic.
Seyerlen ("Beziehungen," pp. 24-25) adduces a further parallel between Gabirol and Spinoza, who respectively introduced medieval and modern philosophy, and holds that each kept his philosophical speculation free from theological bias.
"Fons Vitæ"(i.e., ; Ps. xxxvi 10) is a philosophical dialogue between master and disciple. The book derives its name from the fact that it considers matter and form as the basis of existence and the source of life in every created thing (Kaufmann, "Gesch. der Attributenlehre aus der Jüdischen Religionsphilosophie des Mittelalters," p. 95, note 1). It was translated from the Arabic—the original title having probably been "Yanbu' al-?ayat "—into Latin in the year 1150 under the patronage of Archbishop Raymond of Toledo, who had founded a veritable bureau of translation (Löwenthal, "Pseudo-Aristoteles," p. 5, note 2) consisting of the Archdeacon of Segovia, Dominicus Gundisalvi or Gundisallimus, assisted by a Jewish physician who had been converted to Christianity, John Hispanus or Hispalensis, better known as "Ibn Daud" (corrupted into "Avendehut," or "Avendeath"). Jourdain called attention in 1843 to the important place of Avicebron in the history of philosophy. Haureau, in his "History of Scholastic Philosophy" (1850), dwelt on the philosophy of Avicebron as known through the citations in the "De Substantiis Separatis" of Aquinas. He was followed by Seyerlen, who, having discovered in 1855 a manuscript copy of the "Fons Vitæ" in the Mazarine Library in Paris, gave a synopsis of Gabirolean philosophy in Baur and Zeller's "Theologische Jahrbuücher," xv.-xvi."
3. From the "Jewish Encyclopedia 1906; pub. Funk and Wignals, 1906, article on ibn Pakuda by Kaufmann Kohler and Isaac Broydé, article heading "Bahya's Neoplatonism"
"Bahya's Neoplatonism.
From the style of his writings and the frequent and apt illustrations he uses, it appears more than probable that Bahya was a preacher of rich experience; while his great personality—a soul full of the utmost piety coupled with touching humility and a spirit of tolerance—shines through every line. Though he quotes Saadia's works frequently, he belongs not to the rationalistic school of the Motazilites whom Saadia follows, but, like his somewhat younger contemporary, Solomon ibn Gabirol (1021-1070), is an adherent of Neoplatonic mysticism, often closely imitating the method of the Arabian encyclopedists known as "the Brothers of Purity," as has been shown by Kaufmann, "Die Theologie des Bachya ibn Pakuda," pp. 202-204. Strangely inclined to contemplative mysticism and asceticism, Bahya had nevertheless the common sense to eliminate from his system every element that might obscure the pure doctrine of Jewish monotheism, or might interfere with the sound, practical teachings of the Mosaic and rabbinical law. He wanted to present a religious system at once lofty and pure and in full accord with reason.
The many points of contact that Bahya has with Ibn Gabirol and Gazzali (1059-1111) have led Rosin and Brüll to assume that Bahya borrowed largely from both, and that consequently he lived at a later time than is assumed by Kaufmann, who holds that both Ibn Gabirol and Gazzali were indebted to Bahya (see Kaufmann, l.c. pp. 194, 198, 207; Rosin, "Die Ethik des Maimonides," p. 13; Brüll, "Jahrb." v. 71 et seq.)." abafied (talk) 10:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
An editor has nominated Toledano Tradition, an article on which you have worked or that you created, 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/Toledano Tradition 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) 23:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Abafied, in your "Case against deletion", would you please add numbers to the sections of your argument. That would make it easier to reference a reply. Thank you.Malcolm Schosha (talk) 14:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
No need. Refer to the paragraph you quote as 'para.1', 'para. 2', or whatever. abafied (talk) 06:28, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 10:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I know, but thanks for the reminder. I often forget to sign and only see it on the text after the bot has signed automatically! abafied (talk) 10:46, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
you don't need my permission or agreement to request mediation. request it if you want it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malcolm Schosha (talk • contribs) 12:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
You have been told and given the evidence on other pages that a request for mediation needs your agreement. I have previously given you the link to the Wiki page which lays out the policy saying just that. Here it is again: Wikipedia:Request for Mediation.
You don't want to go through that more formal process, which is why you will not give a yes or no answer to my request to go forward for mediation, and have chosen instead to move for deletion of the {Toledano Tradition]] article. Dispute resolution taken to its conclusion by you? Indeed it is not. How sad that dishonesty has to be exposed in this way! abafied (talk) 12:52, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Read what it says: "The Mediation Committee considers requests to open new cases only where all parties to the dispute indicate willingness to take part in mediation; parties are given seven days from the time of the initial request to indicate their acceptance.Malcolm Schosha (talk) 14:12, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
At last you've read it! Indeed it does say that, which is why I am asking you now if you will agree to further mediation. What is the point of putting up a request if you will not say now whether or not you will sign that greement? In any case, it's been made obvious over the last twelve hours or so what current tactic is - get the article deleted before the mediation process can continue. Wikipedia processes are being deliberately used to censor by deletion. That is why Wikipedia will never be any more than a populist encyclopedia for the most part, a few articles apart. You, in your ignorance, I am sad to say, are adding to that process.
However, that matters not at all: the discussion will continue here and on the deletion pages until the process ends. Neither will the issue of the Toledano Tradition go away: its history and lineage is already attested by scholars. You'll be unable to censor that, or the current work that is being conducted on Neoplatonism in Kabbalah and Jewish Gnosticism in Judaic mysticism of the earlier period. I doubt if scholars will care one way or the other whether their names and work appear in Wikipedia: peer review is beyond the capabilities of most editors here, including you: publishing takes place elsewhere: the tradition continues, however much suppression takes place.
Consider well the words of Plotinus: "there is no religion harder than the truth."abafied (talk) 14:35, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I have placed this on the Administrators Notice Board:
[[1]]
Just to let you know. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 12:43, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Of course; that was expected: refusal to complete the mediation process -> moves to deletion of article -> moves to hopes of banning. What else is new? abafied (talk) 18:57, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi Abafied: Since the Toledano Tradition article is facing the prospect of deletion, and Z'ev ben Shimon Halevi is the author using the terms and system, it would be advisable that its contents be integrated into the Z'ev ben Shimon Halevi article about him, rather than face the prospect of deletion since the contents of Toledano Tradition seems to be based on decent research and sources. IZAK (talk) 12:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Many thanks, IZAK. It'd be a shame if all contents were lost, especially as I know the article's unfinished. However, I'll let AfD play out before deciding what to do with the text. abafied (talk) 13:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Abafied, I do not know if you would find anything of interest in this, but I just received this link [2] through a Neoplatonism e-forum to which I belong. You might, in any case, find the list itself interesting, and a number of excellent scholars belong to it [3]Malcolm Schosha (talk) 00:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading Image:Einsof.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Polly (Parrot) 21:47, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Many thanks. I've put a message on your talk page and the help desk. abafied (talk) 23:12, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I've put up the gif. now as ein_sof_1. It's in English and for free use, so I hope the complies with Wikipedia requirements. It's on the page for Z'ev ben Shimon Haleviabafied (talk) 21:03, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
An image that you uploaded, Image:Einsof.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Enric Naval (talk) 14:03, 20 March 2008 (UTC) Sorry, man, but a bit more of specification on the image origin appears to be needed. Can you specify if this is an image from the book here [4], and if it is a faithful reproduction from a symbol where the creator died more than 70 years ago? (that would place it into the public domain, if I remember the legislation correctly) --Enric Naval (talk) 14:03, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
No, it actually isn't, but was worked up from a 17thC copperplate image on the Kabbalah page. It does, I agree, look rather like the one you put up though, so if it has to come off, then it comes off. All that work in paintbox/PaintShopPro for nowt! :( abafied (talk) 14:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
I looked at the kabbalah article, but only found Image:Ein_sof.png, so I can't comment on that.
If both your image and that image are based off from the same copperplate, and the similarity on the typographies is because of being from the same public domain source, then there is no copyright violation. If they are not, you could rewrite the letters on another typography, as soon as the positions of the letters are based on that copperplate you mention. --Enric Naval (talk) 14:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
I've no idea if the other drawing was from the same copperplate. I'll take the gif off the page, though, and it's best deleted from WikiCommons until I sort it out. abafied (talk) 14:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Many thanks. abafied (talk) 15:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Just seen the image page and the image you put up. I used image 4, but worked it up, basing my design on a particular medieval kabbalistic concept. It looks as though image 1 may have used similar sources, though I couldn't say for sure. I notice, though, that that has Hebew on all the white rings, which mine doesn't. However, I think I've come up with a solution - to put the Hebrew into English, esp. because more people will understand that abafied (talk) 16:02, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
It looks like a good solution to me. P.D.: Once you feel you have solved all problems with the image, you can upload it, remove the copyvio tag from the image, and explain what you did on Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2008_March_20/Images. I have that page on my watchlist, so I will see your message there. I will add a Free Use Rationale when you are done, so it is all clear --Enric Naval (talk) 16:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Will do. Many thanks. I have a habit of messing up uploading pics, so fingers crossed. abafied (talk) 17:32, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
I know you watch the page carefully, and suggested the delete yourself, but for sake of courtesy:
I've put up the gif. now as ein_sof_1. It's in English and for free use, so I hope it complies with Wikipedia requirements. It's on the page for Z'ev ben Shimon Haleviabafied (talk) 21:05, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Toledano Tradition, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Toledano Tradition. Verdatum (talk) 14:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Fine. It's better to delete it than have it hacked about. I can better use the article elsewhere than on Wikipedia, now. Thank you for your help in trying to play middle man and for help on the technical side. abafied (talk) 14:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
You can use {{helpme}} template for when you need help. Just put the template on your talk page with your request for help, and a volunteer will answer you.
For now, if you upload the image and try to fill it as well as you can, then you can leave a note on my talk page and I'll take a look at it and try to make the necessary ammends and tell you what I learn. I'm not familiarised enough with the process to help you more than that --Enric Naval (talk) 14:36, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Many thanks, enric. abafied (talk) 15:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
A photo of the image is now an image page: Image:Wk1.jpg Could you check it over for accuracy of origins, please? abafied (talk) 12:24, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Note to helpers: once you have offered help, please remove this template or replace it with {{tnull|helpme}}.
Last year I made a gif for free use on Wikipedia, from a photo of Z'ev ben Shimon Halevi by the photographer, Mayotte Magnus. She had given her permission for the image to be used on WP, provided the photo itself was credited to her on the Image Page. I didn't understand the WP copyright process, couldn't find or fill in the right forms, or know what to say, and it was deleted. I'd like to re-upload it, if that's still possible, but would need help with the form-filling/finding. Can you help, please? abafied (talk) 15:53, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
From the license list, I used the option "The copyright holder gave me permission to use this work only in wikipedia articles". However, i couldn't change the licency. Look at Image:Dobbsicon.svg. You will need to add the photo to an article and then add a tag like "Non-free fair use in|name_of_article_that_has_the_photo" --Enric Naval (talk) 12:46, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
P.D.:once you do that, leave a message, since you still need the free use rationale. Also, the licensing is not totally correct, i couldn't find a proper license --Enric Naval (talk) 12:48, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
My user page has an example of free use rationale. Also, go to Image:Puerto_Madero_Torres.jpg, the summary section has a free rationale use. Go to the summary section, and hit "edit". You will see a piece of code that starts with "Non-free use rationale". You can copy that, paste it on the summary of your photo, and substitute the information for your information. Remember not to delete the code that there is already on your photo! You need both the summary and the free use rationale --Enric Naval (talk) 15:09, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
The photo is now correct. What you needed was a non-free license tag in addition to the "Withpermission" tag, and "Non-free poster" is probably good enough, since I couldn't find any license specifically for portraits of persons, so the license for posters will have to do. Good work, man --15:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Ah, many thanks, enric. abafied (talk) 16:49, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Regarding the 3 paintings, you can use the same license as that other image.
However, you won't be able to add 3 fair use images to an article unless you have very strong arguments to keep each one of them. If the images are just to show that he has made good-looking paintings, or to decorate the article, then they won't be accepted. You have to justify each image by separate.
For example, in The Dirty Pair, there is a lot of fair use images, and each one has its own justification. Notice also how there is no section with two fair use images, we use one and only one fair use image for every comic, and even then we are careful to pick either the cover or a representative image where we can make commentaries that help to improve the article, like commenting on the drawing style, the influences, and how the style has evolved over the time. So make sure that you integrate each painting into the article, and that each one of them advances a text on the article. In the image page, on the "Purpose of use" part, you should add a little comment like, for example, "showing the influence of school xxxxx after she travelled to yyyyy", or "use of colors when painting xxxxx type of paintings". Provide context, don't say only "this is her most famous painting", explain why and how it was famous: for example, "this is her most famous painting because of xxxxx circumstance, because yyyyy said it was good, it made more famous because of zzzz, because after painting it ttttt happened, etc".
Also, adding images in this way allows you to write better articles :) --Enric Naval (talk) 16:52, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Yes, you should put each justification on each image page. Many editors will tag the image if it doesn't have a justification right there on its page. You can also add "For comparison with image X" --Enric Naval (talk) 19:53, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Ah, many thanks, enric. abafied (talk) 20:31, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Sir Moses Montefore, a Jewish activist who died 123 years ago this month
"Censorship" of names of G-d
There is an interesting discussion currently taking place regarding whether or not it is acceptable to censor (i.e. G-d, HaShem->YodHey) names of G-d in articles to protect Jews who may be reading or editing the article. You can weigh in here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Judaism#Yahweh.
Article Cleanup Lists User:B. Wolterding has generously offered us use of his bot to generate lists that show which articles of ours are tagged for cleanup. You can read more about this service here: User:B._Wolterding/Cleanup_listings and if you would like to take him up on his offer, contact him on his talk page.
WikiProject Kabbalah's only Featured and Good articles have been removed from the WikiProject, on the grounds that neither article (Diane Keaton and David Beckham, respectively) actually mention the subject's affiliation with Kabbalah. If you have sourced information linking either of these people to Kabbalah, please add it so the articles can be returned to the WikiProject.
After a rather heated discussion, there are now two barnstars for use by the Jewish WikiProjects, {{The Jewish Barnstar}} and {{The New Jewish Barnstar}}, and you can choose which one you would like to use.. Remember: barnstars are for rewarding users who are doing good work on the project or on Judaism, Jewish History, or Kabbalah articles, and anyone can give anyone else a barnstar. If you see a user who you thinks deserves a thank you, give them a barnstar!
To Do/Help Requests
If you have some spare time on your hands, we could use an article about a Kabbalah scholar named Moshe Idel. According to HG there are quite a few sources easily available, you can contact him if you have questions. Be sure to nominate it for DYK if the finished article is eligible.
The folks at Shimon Peres need some assistance from someone familiar with both the Hebrew calendar and language to help them figure out the subject's birthday. If you can help, please see Talk:Shimon_Peres#Birthday.
We get a lot of articles that are being created and not announced! By announcing new articles, you attract attention to them, and the more people looking and editing the better they will get. If you would like your new article to appear in the newsletter, add it here for Judaism and Kabbalah and here for Jewish History.
There are some 40 odd standing requests for Judaism related articles. Please make them! I would, but I'm too busy writing this. .
This newsletter was automatically delivered because you are a member of one or more Judaism related WikiProjects. If you would like to opt out of future mailings, please remove your name from this list. As always, please direct all questions, comments, requests, barnstars, offers of help, and angry all-caps anti-semitic rants to my talk page. Thanks, and have a great month. L'Aquatique[approves|this|message] 20:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Newsletter delivery by xenobot 20:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Wkenton1a.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 18:09, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
I've done what I could on the media page and its talk page to explain why the photo is irreplaceable from free sources. I don't know if the explanation satisfies Wiki's new criteria. Let me know, if not. abafied (talk) 20:04, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Louise Hopkins may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
] MFA Programme in 1994 after a two year course. She also attended the [University of Northumbria] (formerly [[Newcastle upon Tyne Polytechnic]] from 1985-1988, graduating from there with a B.A.(Hons)
*''Scotland and Venice'', 52nd Venice Biennale], in 2007;
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:32, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Louise Hopkins may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
* [http://www.museumsgalleriesscotland.org.uk/member/paisley-museum-and-art-galleries Paisley Museum
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:45, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I've just spotted your addition of biographical info on TW. I've added similar information myself previously, only for it to be swiftly deleted. (Perhaps it was incorrect, though I found a credible citation.) Can you provide a reference to an external source for the added info? It will certainly improve the chances of the info not being removed! A piece in the Observer 2 years ago referred to her being in her early 50s and prompted some interesting comment. http://www.theguardian.com/stage/2013/jan/14/timberlake-wertenbaker-crime-replenishment There definitely seems to be some dispute about her biographical details. Agarpp (talk) 10:11, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Abafied. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, Abafied. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, Abafied. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, Abafied. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 10:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Louise Hopkins may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
