User talk:Rami R

Welcome!

Hello, Rami R, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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 place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Cheers, Tewfik^Talk 16:03, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Rabin page contribution deletion

Today I added two references added to the Rabin page to balance the presentation. Kindly explain why you deleted them. Emesz 21:04, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

You removed the ISBNs. That constitutes vandalism. Rami R 10:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, unless I am mistaken, that constitutes a "bug" in the software. I just noticed that when I edit the list of books the ISBN numbers are dropped and all that is left is ISBN ... When I added 2 references I didn't notice this. Do you now why this happens (to avoid future problems)?

Also, "vandalism" is a purposeful act, this was accidental ... If something like this comes up again with someone it is best to send a note advising of the problem.Emesz 14:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Article talk page.

I prefer content disputes in article Talk space. Italia^vivi 20:29, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Rabin

Be aware that I did more changes except the external link. --TRFA 09:53, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I am aware. I don't really care about the wording, just the external link. Rami R 17:53, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

RE: Don't feed the trolls

Aye, I shouldn't, but that one had be particularily ticked off. I am many things, but anti-semitic I am most definatly not. Hell, my dad's family are ashkanazi. Narson 18:18, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

why did you delete my improvements to Menachem Begin article?

Rami R, Please explain why you deleted my improvements to Menachem Begin article, quoting reliable sources and including appropriate citations? Are you going to contest the undisputed historical fact that following Menachem Begin's involvement in the Deir Yassin massacre, many leading Jewish thinkers, philosophers and rabbis -- including Albert Einstein, Hannah Arendt, Sydney Hook -- published a letter in the New York Times calling Begin's party a fascist party, accusing him of terrorism, and warning the public to stay away from him? Moreover, are you going to contest the fact that many in the Yishuv considered Begin a terrorist? Please note that all my edits are supported by sources and citations, whereas the version of the article which I edited had absolutely no sources, and was not fit to be published in a reliable encyclopedia. Although it is hard to remain calm in the face of politically-motivated censorship, I will remain civil in my discourse and hope you can maintain civility too. Firstamend 15:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

edits to Dem Primaries page

Hi!

I've made some changes to the image gallery on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_%28United_States%29_presidential_primaries%2C_2008 , and thought you might want to see if it's okay with you Enlightened Bystander (talk) 20:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

"Attacks" on Obama's Talk Page

I've been contributing for three or four years, and I'll thank you not to refer me to policy pages like I am a noob. I did not attack CltFn, I called him/her out for being intellectually dishonest. In future, please direct all correspondence with me to my talk page, at Scientz. And while we're at it, don't ever delete anything I've put on a talk page again. Edits to articles are fair game, but not in talk pages.Scientz (talk) 18:37, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

• I didn't see an established editor commenting, I saw an Anon claiming to be a registered editor, and had no immediate reason to believe this claim.
• I admit that I may have been too quick to judge your comments as attacks. However your comments about CltFn where unwarranted/unneeded, as CltFn hadn't edited the article since January 13 (2 weeks ago), hadn't edited the talk page since January 17, hadn't edited at all since January 19 (except to request unblocks on his talk page). The discussion topic itself wasn't active the past 3 days.
• (generic argument not specific to this case) removing comments from talk pages is generally considered legitimate if the comments constitute vandalism, trolling, or in special cases, personal attacks. Again as I said before, I may have been overzealous in judging your edits as attacks.

I apologize for the misunderstanding. Rami R 21:42, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough . . . and no hard feelings, I might add. My Firefox doesn't seem to possess the ability to keep me logged in as me whenever I go to Wikipedia. There are many instances when I forget to log in before editing an article, so I can understand the confusion. As far as CltFn, I had read the first 10-15 responses and then decided to add my two cents . . . I have since been pleased to note that the user has been banned indefinitely. Scientz (talk) 02:46, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

USS Liberty Incident

Why did you remove my comments on the Talk Page and mark them as vandalism. You are pushing Jew POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.126.34.118 (talk) 19:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

learned something new on Wikipedia

I learned that Obama is willing to invade Pakistan. Nobody else wants to so that's really important for an encyclopedia. Who knows? He could be right?

See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ABarack_Obama&diff=203674181&oldid=203673852

I saw the talk page then saw the history where you deleted someone's comment saying it's not sourced. Well, now it's sourced. I found an interesting article. Please restore your deletion. Thanks. 116.12.165.227 (talk) 04:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Menahem Begin's quote

Why is that quote any worse than the other quotes? Since when does Wikipedia demand secondary and tertiary sources, if most of the material is completely unsourced?--Doom777 (talk) 21:13, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

W/O an air date "Response to Yaron Dekel, Israel Broadcast Authority" is invalid as a primary source. And thus, w/o a secondary or tertiary source to confirm the quote or the circumstances it was made, the quote is simply unsourced, and per WP:V "Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed". Rami R 10:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Rfb participation thanks

Hello, Rami.

I wanted to personally thank you for taking part in the project-wide discussions regarding my candidacy for bureaucratship. After bureaucratic discussion, the bureaucrats decided that there was sufficient significant and varied opposition to my candidacy, and thus no consensus to promote. Although personally disappointed, I both understand and respect their decision, especially in light of historical conservatism the project has had when selecting its bureaucrats. If you have any further suggestions or comments as to how you think I could help the project, please let me know. Once again, thank you for your support. -- Avi (talk) 17:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

new section

Rami,

Kindly contact me directly at furtiveadmirer@hotmail.com. I wrote to you on your home page in error. I do not wish to discuss your deletions of my Jonathan Pollard facts on this page. If you choose not to respond, kindly have your supervisor contact me with clarification of why you are so nasty and disrespectful??? Furtive admirer (talk) 16:48, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I will not contact you via email. If you wish to discuss anything, you can do so here on my talk page, on your talk page, or on the article talk page. Suggesting that I am paid to edit here (as you explicitly state here) is a gross violation of wikipedia's policies, such as Wikipedia:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:Assume good faith. Do so again and I will report you to the appropriate notice board, which will most likely result in you being blocked.

As for the article content issue: The bulk of the information you added was not attributed to reliable resources, as required by Wikipedia:Verifiability. However, even if it were, it was not neutrally phrased (for instance, writing in all caps[1] can not be considered encyclopedic, to say the very least). All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, as per Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

To summarize:

• Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research for what can be written in articles,
• Wikipedia:Neutral point of view for how it can be written, and
• Wikipedia:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:Assume good faith, so you know what not to do when you disagree with other editors.

Rami R 17:49, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

p.s You haven't explained what that last bit of vandalism was for[2]... oh well. Rami R 17:49, 23 June 2008 (UTC)