User talk:LeeMulod333

Speedy deletion of Boris Kandov

A tag has been placed on Boris Kandov, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD A7.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Toddstreat1 02:57, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bukhar[i]an Jews

Your remarks toward me on this article's talkpage are wholly unacceptable. Please review WP:NPA. Your belligerant attitude and your acrimonious remarks do nothing to build consensus, instead they betray a fundamental failure to understand civility. Tomer ^talk 19:31, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have now made an absolute mess. I don't even know yet how to fix it, but what you've done now violates GFDL, a gross breach of Wikipedia policy. I'm going to try to figure out how to undo it, and recommend that you leave the article alone until we work out the whole naming thing on the talkpage. Tomer ^talk 00:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Continued reverts

Shavua` tov. If you continue with your pov-pushing and removal of requests for citations, you will find yourself blocked. Kol tov, Tomer ^talk 03:11, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you stop doing what you're doing. If I will be blocked, you will also deserve to be blocked. It won't be fair.

What I'm doing it removing your insertion of bias, based on your personal experience, into the article, and reinserting the requests for citation that you keep removing. What you are doing constitutes vandalism on the last count, and failure to follow consensus on the second. Your persistence and failure to contribute constructively to discussion on the article talk page (preferring instead to treat it as a blog in most cases, indicate that you are more interested in using Wikipedia as a soapbox, rather than in working collaboratively on an encyclopedia. I highly recommend that you read each and every one of the links I have put into this comment, as your activities are in direct violation of a number of core Wikipedia policies, which constitutes grounds for blocking. Regards, Tomer ^talk 00:27, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What you're doing is violating wikipedia. You are putting false information on this site. This is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. Are you telling me that you're allowed to post false statements on wikipedia?

No, what I'm telling you is that you're the one who's posting false statements on Wikipedia, and that if you don't stop it, you're going to be blocked. I tire of your petulance. Tomer ^talk 23:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked for a period of 24 hours for harassment of other users and expressions of prejudice that create a hostile environment. Comments like this are unacceptable. To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. Raymond Arritt 19:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What it meams

Hi. You cannot add your own opinions of what historical events consisted of or what naming conventions and designations are. In the interest of neutral exposition, you need to attribute your claims to citations of reliable sources so that these can be verified as not being your own original invention, or at least, that they represent the scholarly consensus. If, however, you continue to edit war and revert without comment, your block will continue to increase until you will no longer be permitted to continue editing here. Thanks in advance. El_C 00:55, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regrettably, since you did not respond, and continued to revert without attempting to discuss the underlying issues, you have been blocked for 48 hours. Please do read carefully what I wrote to you above. Many thanks again. El_C 01:46, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Content Dispute on Bukhori language

Hey, I noticed you are in the middle of a content dispute on Bukhori language and a possibly an edit war. Please be mindful of WP:3RR and try not to respond to incivility with more incivility. If you are having a major disagreement with this editor you should open a request for a 3rd Opinion. If the user is being incivil you should file a report on [[1]]. Nn123645 (talk) 17:55, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But TShiloh doesn't respect me or any Bukharians. He doesn't listen to what I say. He's ignorant and hostile towards me and I apparently don't appreciate that. I know that in the beginning, I wasn't so kind to him but at least I apoligized. He doesn't even care.—Preceding unsigned comment added by LeeMulod333 (talk • contribs)

Then I would open up a report on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts and seek a Request for Comment on him.Nn123645 (talk) 18:03, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a good flow chart for how to deal with a difficult editor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Difficult_editor_-_flow_chart.png. Nn123645 (talk) 18:05, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, something that I should probably add. The ideal page to discuss content is on the Talk page of an article, not in the edit summaries. So I would definatly place a message there and probably go to his user talk page and place a link to the message you placed on the article talk page. Nn123645 (talk) 18:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LeeMulod333, you know full well that you are lying. I don't have anything against Bukharans. I do listen to what you say. Listening to what you say, however, does not mean that once I've listened, that I am required to agree with you. As you are well aware, you have not contributed anything other than "I'm Bukharian, so I should know what Bukharians are called in English" to the relevant discussion on Talk:Bukharan Jews. As I have explained to you ad nauseum, your say-so may be good enough for your user page, but is not good enough for an encyclopedia. Your refusal to contribute constructively to that discussion has done nothing to elevate your credibility. Your reverting a number of editors who disagree with you, characterizing their edits as "vandalism", and characterizing them as "ignorant", "stupid", "disrespectful" "idiots" does even less to garner any respect for yourself. Your saying that I am the cause of antisemitism because I disagree with you is a real low, even for you. When you remove requests for citation from articles and call the requests for citation "vandalism", you are, yourself, engaging in vandalism. When you are the sole editor reverting people who, if you knew anything about them, you should be ashamed of yourself for reverting and denigrating (and no, I'm not talking about myself), in order to insert your POV spelling, you are doing so in violation of wikipedia policies which I have already listed for you elsewhere. Whining and complaining that people don't respect you will garner you no respect from anyone who goes to investigate, where they will find your path of destruction and probably end up blocking you permanently, something I have not done for the singular reason that I am an involved party, and a perception of conflict of interest might raise its head. At this point, I admit, I think a permanent block is the only thing that will stop your rampage. Tomer ^talk 04:09, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that a permanent block is good for you too. But I'm not doing that. We should leave the Bukharian Jewish page the way it is because it has both Bukharan and Bukharian in the article. I think that's far. As for the notable Bukharians, I think that some of them can have Bukharan in their bio. What do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeeMulod333 (talk • contribs) 18:01, 19 November 2007

As I have said, the name, regardless of whether you like it, most often used in English language primary sources, is "Bukharan". Including "Bukharian" is an acquiescence to the fact that a significant portion of the community itself seems to prefer that spelling. Primary sources, however, overwhelmingly do not. The name used in Wikipedia should reflect what the majority of primary sources use, as Wikipedia is not in the business of advocating a minority spelling--as I have said previously: Wikipedia articles report what it found in primary sources, it does not advocate positions, nor does it prefer minority spellings at the expense of majority spellings. Wikipedia is not a democracy, nor is it a place for every minor group to come and carve out a place for advocacy. Doing so would be a complete violation of a great many "NOT"s in WP:NOT. Using the spelling "Bukharian" may be acceptable in some places, and it should definitely be used in names of organizations which use that spelling, as I have spelled out weeks ago already on Talk:Bukharan Jews, a discussion you didn't bother to participate in, at least not in anything remotely resembling "constructively".

On the subject of your advocating a permanent block against me, I think you'll have to come up with something more substantial than my disagreeing with your opinions. As for blocking me yourself, I think you will find you can't. Tomer ^talk 05:53, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't want to get back to the same subject by you have to admitt it. By saying that there is no such thing as Bukharian is being ignorant to the culture. Can you please explain?

Explain what? You are the one who has said there is no such thing as Bukharan. I have not said there's no such thing as Bukharian. How can I explain something I haven't said? As far as ignorance goes, saying "ignorant to" demonstrates ignorance of English. There is nothing here for me to admit to, so far as I can see. Tomer ^talk 05:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In English, both terms are excepted. But Bukharians, especially the ENGLISH-SPEAKING ones call themselves Bukharian Jews, not Bukharan. I heard that Bukharians recently made a Bukharian lobby in the US. The lobby is not called Bukharan. Don't you think that Bukharians would know what they are talking about? And a lot of resources where people do address my people as Bukharans are wrong. Bukharan isn't a term. But to make you happy, I will keep some notable Bukharians as Bukharans and in the article, both names will be mentioned. I'm being more tolerant than you here.

Signing Talk Pages

Hello. 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. 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. Nn123645 (talk) 01:54, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFC/USER discussion concerning you (LeeMulod333)

Hello, LeeMulod333. Please be aware that a request for comments has been filed concerning your conduct on Wikipedia. The RFC entry can be found by your name in this list, and the actual discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/LeeMulod333, where you may want to participate.

-- Nn123645 (talk) 06:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC) .[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Bahar.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bahar.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 02:45, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks

It is fine to discuss and disagree with edits, but it is against Wikipedia policy to make personal attacks on other editors, which you did in this edit summary. From looking at your talk page, it appears that you have previously engaged in such hostile editing. You do not know why the previous editor deleted information from Sarah Jessica Parker, unless that editor has specifically stated the reasons. To attribute the edit to anti-Israel and anti-Zionistic motives is disrespectful and needlessly has the potential to stir up conflict. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 00:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May 2008

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Sarah Jessica Parker. Thank you. Sdrtirs (talk) 10:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dushanbe synagogue

Hi, I noticed your comment at the talk page of the Dushanbe synagogue article. I recently added two new images to the article, taken by another user. They were taken in June 2006, although the article says that demolition began in February 2006. Can you please verify whether the two images in the article (I'll re-post them here) were of this synagogue or the new one on on Nazyina Khikmeta Street? Was a new synagogue even built? Finally, can you please verify this sentence: Two other synagogues in Tajikistan were also closed during the Soviet period. Thank you very much. Khoi khoi 23:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of "Po Sit"

A page you created, Po Sit, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how they are important or significant, and thus why they should be included in an encyclopedia. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and the guidelines for biographies in particular.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:12, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Shlomo.gif listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Shlomo.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 09:22, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Dorrit.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Dorrit.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:57, 11 November 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:57, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello LeeMulod333! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 6 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Zvia Leviev Alazarov - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Boris Kandov - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 00:51, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Boris Kandov

The article Boris Kandov has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources to comply with notability requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links:
Boris Kandov – news, books, scholar
Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Darkwind (talk) 03:46, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Zvia Leviev Alazarov

A tag has been placed on Zvia Leviev Alazarov requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. — Zhernovoi (talk) 17:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Itzhak Yehoshua

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

A tag has been placed on Itzhak Yehoshua requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about it should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you can assert the notability of the subject, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the article's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

See the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. Nsk92 (talk) 14:42, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Boris Kandov

The article Boris Kandov has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced biography of a living person

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Patchy1 09:58, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 16:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]