This is an archive of past discussions with Avraham. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
< Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 > |
All Pages: | 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - 20 - 21 - 22 - 23 - 24 - 25 - 26 - 27 - 28 - 29 - 30 - 31 - 32 - 33 - 34 - 35 - 36 - 37 - 38 - 39 - 40 - 41 - 42 - 43 - 44 - 45 - 46 - 47 - 48 - 49 - 50 - 51 - 52 - 53 - 54 - 55 - 56 - 57 - 58 - 59 - 60 - ... (up to 100) |
Avraham,
I just noticed that you created a biographical entry for me on Wikipedia. Would it be inappropriate for me to edit my own biographical entry?
Mark Adler —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.214.243.45 ( talk) 04:23, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. I made some small factual corrections, and provided some links for future edits by others on the "talk" page for the article. Dradler ( talk) 05:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi Avi: My attention was drawn to the Talk:Hummus page, see Talk:Hummus#Hebrew/jewish/Israeli references and Talk:Hummus#RfC where some users are deploying the worst kind of blatant antisemitic and Anti-Zionist vitriol in violation of WP:HATE and WP:CIVIL, over a minor food article, yet, unbelievable. There are comments there that should be deleted on sight as well. Please check out that page and the violating editors. Thank you, IZAK ( talk) 11:09, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi Avraham. Thanks for your attention. See User talk:Shirahadasha#I have agreed to your proposal where I notify User Shirahadasha ( talk · contribs)'s agreeing to Shira's proposal at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/IZAK2#Proposed intermediate verdict 3 (and I still hold by Wikipedia:Requests for comment/IZAK2#Proposed intermediate verdict 2). What are your thoughts on the matter? Thanks. IZAK ( talk) 16:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi Avi: Thank you for giving this matter your serious attention. I wanted to let you know that I have now endorsed the latest "Proposed intermediate verdict 3.1" at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/IZAK2#Proposed intermediate verdict 3.1. Thanks, IZAK ( talk) 16:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Aha. Thanks. I was thinking more of one for the Talk page itself, but that definitely looks in the right territory. Gordonofcartoon ( talk) 06:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
I fear that too many bad Python references will expand the discussion beyond the bounds of acceptable RfA behavior... -- Kakofonous ( talk) 03:07, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
LOL - all I can say is, I hope that finger was not pointed at me :-). Shoessss | Chat 03:22, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Avraham, I received your note, tho I will say I am confused that I received it in the first place. You seem to be under the impression that I believe it is inappropriate for someone closely associated with an organization to edit it. This is not correct. I wrote on the talk page of Jacobadlerarkansas you can feel free to make neutral edits to the article. In further discussions on the article's talk page IZAK further explained what this meant and I posted a welcome message on the user's talk page. Further, I didn't realize you were at all associated with this article to begin with. I don't see you in the edit history or on the talk page. I am right to assume you randomly came across this article and thus commented on what you thought was my assumed misunderstanding on WP:COI? Bstone ( talk) 03:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank-you for such lovely comments :). Seraphim♥ Whipp 17:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Avraham! My name is Victor. I am very fascinated Wikipedia user and I hope that my knowledge will be useful here. I take a keen interest in real estate and mortgage and now I'm working at the article Fizber (internet company). Some days ago it was nominaded for deletion. So I extremely need your detached opinion about it here - Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2008_March_1#Fizber_.28internet_company.29. Thank you in advance. :) -- Prokopenya Viktor ( talk) 23:09, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Ed O'Loughlin continues to make headlines in Australia. The editorial of the last Australian Jewish News was devoted to him, as was a column that he wrote in the paper in his own defence.
Despite what your co-editors might have thought about inclusion of O'Loughlin on the basis of noteriety, I've no doubts they are wrong.
It is something of a pity that with all the excellent values of Wikipedia it is at heart rotten. http://www.theage.com.au/news/biztech/bwiki-woesb-founder-accused-of-rort-to-fund-massages-and-wine/2008/03/05/1204402516874.html
Oh well, win some lose some.
Kind regards,
Adon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adon Emett ( talk • contribs) 10:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)