Welcome to my talk page!

I waswelcomed to Wikipedia byHappy138 on March 17, 2009. As this is my talk page, you are welcome here as well and are welcome to leave a message, ask a question, or just say hi. Pleasesign your messages ondiscussion pages using fourtildes (~~~~) as this will automatically insert your username and the date.Thanks!

Joe - i am interested in your help regarding my page onCamp Moshava, Wild Rose, WI I would like to correct all of the things that you noted and use your advice on additional help. is there a way to get in touch with you other than wiki talk? also, is this rabbi harris the same rabbi harris from the chofetz chaim yeshiva? thanksJGotz (talk)09:04, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Joe - you said that i ignored you and i didn't and now i can't get in touch with you. I want your help! i'm on your team here. Please work with meJGotz (talk)09:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i have tried getting in touch with you several times and you ignored my requests repeatedly. Seriously, joe, what is your vendetta against the wild rose branch, i have tried working WITH you many times. Why havent you been attacking any of the other branches? Your behavior is outrageous, direct discrimination for no reason that i can understand and unfair. Please respond as soon as possible so that we can move forward.

Howdy. To address your concerns as to a potential vendetta against Wild Rose. You can see on your talk page that it was tagged for deletion in June 2008, September 2008 and the nominator of the AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Moshava (Wisconsin)) stated in the nomination that there had been efforts to improve the article a few months ago and it still did not pass Wikipedia notability guidelines due to a lack of third party, reliable sources. To the best of my knowledge I did not tag the article for deletion and I did not start the AfD. I have nothing against Moshava. I've been at one of the camps, have friends who have been both campers and staff, and have family members who were among the founders. While I made suggestions as to improvements and helped edit the Wild Rose page, I did not findWP:RS for Wild Rose on it's own. As to the other branches, I feel that unless sources can be found for an article about IO, Stone or Ennismore, they should all be merged to one article about Moshava. Why have I not done this? Because I'm not spending much time on WP these days and am not spending time doing the research that creating such an article would entail. I also am not familiar enough with the camps to create a solid article. If someone else can, that would be great and I'd be happy to help out but I can't run that particular project. One last comment about the AfD. You can readWikipedia:Deletion review and that may be helpful.Joe407 (talk)07:30, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am interested in expanding the article on rabbi harris.I am a student in his yeshiva.First of all any suggestions?Also, why is it rated low importance. His Yeshiva is the second largest in America after Lakewood!Talmidchochom (talk)00:50, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First, yasher koach on the interest. Next, are you looking to expand the article on R' Harris or on the Chofetz Chaim Yeshiva(s)? Or both! Regardless, you should start with sources. Search the google news archives for articles. Print books or newspapers that you have are good too. Once you have information fromreliable sources (not self-promotion web sites or blogs), start adding information that you have in your sources. use the {{findsources}} template. For example: {{findsources|Dovid Harris}} gives:Find sources: Google (books ·news ·scholar ·free images ·WP refs) ·FENS ·JSTOR ·TWL. Once, you've added the info, make sure you give a citation. Always write as a neutral party. Feel free to ask me for any further help.Joe407 (talk)05:04, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe407, and thank you for the warm comments! I also noticed that you created an article about Bahad 16. Cheers! Do you serve in theHome Front Command? If so, please consider ways to improve the article, because I have little personal knowledge on the subject. Cheers,Ynhockey^(Talk)22:20, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do we know each other?--Kotzker (talk)06:57, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so. I saw your edits and thought you might be interested in helping out.Joe407 (talk)06:53, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Please don't add{{stub}} to articles likeRule of three (writing) which are substantially more than a stub article (described atWP:STUB as "A stub is an article containing only a few sentences of text" ) - it just wastes the time of people atWP:STUBSORT. If you feel the article needs expanding, Wikifying, etc there are plenty ofother templates you can use. Thanks,PamD (talk)10:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. ThanksJoe407 (talk)10:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's not much indicationin the article of why he is notable. The notability guidelines arehere.Deb (talk)12:50, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Be bold.Jon513 (talk)02:41, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those were some good edits you madetoChabad today.Debresser (talk)13:16, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why thank you.Joe407 (talk)09:09, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have not complete the afd process atIra Zlotowitz. The steps are listed in the afd header, or seeTemplate:AfD footer for a fuller explanation. You can also considerWikipedia:Proposed deletion which is a system for deleting article that their deletion is unlikely to be contested.Jon513 (talk)22:45, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say I have a rampage against Video Game music bands; quite the contrary actually! There are quite a few I listen to. But that doesn't change the fact that Wikipedia has guidelines for inclusion. You're more then welcome to create an article about Video Game music, and link off to another wiki that includes these more obscure bands, or lobby to have the notability guidelines changed.

With that said, I'm not trying to get every article removed... just the ones that don't meet the requirements. Remember that every page has a cost, both in server resources and in human time to maintain and improve them. Its my opinion that Wikipedia gets cluttered with many articles that really belong on that organizations Bio page on their own website.

If the pages I tagged for a speedy delete or a deletion discussion have sources that make them notable, I'm all for keeping them and improving them so that they are much higher quality pages. Thanks for your time and hopefully you see the point I'm trying to make, no aggression intended.Cazbahrocker (talk)18:40, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I added some blue links, deleted red links and added an infobox on the articlefr:Institut Pouah. It lacks, however, some source to remove the banner "à sourcer", can you add it please?—Precedingunsigned comment added byK90 (talk •contribs)14:46, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

K90, Thank you for your help withInstitut Pouah. I think that at this point it has enough sources that the "à sourcer" box can be removed. You should askPatrick as he was the one who put it there.Joe407 (d) 18 juin 2009 à 22:37 (CEST)

No problem, I am in charge of it.--K90^d17:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no mention of what I assume is a Wiki policy atG11.

I clicked onG11 since you mentioned it when you wrote the following on mytalk page-

Just so you should be aware, your two articles about "Central park to sinai" and about "Roy Neuberger" will be speedy deleted underg11 if you don't clean them up fast.

Both Roy and the book need to be notable and mentioned in a bunch of news articles verifying that. Joe407 (talk) 16:45, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I responded, perhaps hastily, but definitely not meaning to flare out-

It was not intended as advertising for Roy S, the son, or Roy R, the 105 year old father.

This son of Roy R. the 105 year old (July 21 to be 106) founder of the famous brokerage firm doesn't need my plugs or advertising. I'll work on making it look less than an ad, but considering that Roy S, the son, wrote 2 more books (and the father one more) since the book came out, that would be like advertising breathing - a good idea for each of us, including the person in my mirror, to do it, but it doesn't need advertising - breathing is a best-seller.

I will try to add more information about both Roy S's first book into that article as well as more about Roy S himself into his article, but please, if you are willing to take the time, update the G11 disambiguation page, so that I can "checklist" my efforts. Thanks in advance.

User_talk:Dad7

• *PLEASE NOTE* There are 2 Roy Neubergers, father (Roy R) and son (Roy S). By "bunch of articles" about "Roy" I assume you mean the son, correct? Also, please note that the son's first book filled in a number of not well know details about the father and also the late mother, Marie Salant Neuberger, an art patron.

Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.Jon513 (talk)07:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Joe. Chase D. Fonteno 07:17, 3 August 2009 (UTC)—Precedingunsigned comment added byChase Fonteno (talk •contribs)

Greetings Joe407. Am going to revert your move as per MoS article name guidelines. Most people know the guy as Sonny and Wikipedia is clear on that. Just to give you an example, how many people would type inTheodore Walter "Sonny" Rollins. I rest my case, M'Lud. Cheers!--Technopat (talk)09:46, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, definitely better.Deb (talk)11:48, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe407! I noticed that you removed the merge tag from the Homefront Command and Bahad 16 articles. Does that mean you oppose the merger? Just because there was no discussion, does not mean that the merger doesn't need to be done. Back then, there were 3 supports and 0 opposes for the merger, meaning unanimous consensus. It's simply a fact that not all mergers are simple, and sometimes we postpone difficult mergers until there is time to do them. For example, just a few weeks ago I merged 2 articles intoModi'in-Maccabim-Re'ut, a merger that gained consensus about a year beforehand but was not completed. If you oppose the merger of Bahad 16 into Homefront Command, please say so on talk (with a reason), while if you support it, let's complete the merger. —Ynhockey^(Talk)16:53, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. mea culpa.Joe407 (talk)03:58, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I have also removed your ref on Bahad 16—it is highly appreciated that you are trying to source IDF-related articles, but that source did not mention Bahad 16, and did not support the claims made in the article that the source was attributed to. —Ynhockey^(Talk)16:53, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any particular information that should be added?Davidmanheim (talk)05:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content fromIsrael Defense Forces. When removing text, please specify a reason in theedit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article'stalk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from thepage history. Take a look at thewelcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use thesandbox. Thank you.Liftarn (talk)21:04, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content fromEli Gerstner. When removing text, please specify a reason in theedit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article'stalk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from thepage history. Thank you.------00:08, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A pleasure. Once a page as three or more project boxes on it, it makes it much easier to read, no? --Avi (talk)14:59, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Joe407, this is an automated message fromSDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added toBilal Zubedi has been removed. It was removed by202.143.123.109 with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please considerdiscussing your concerns with 202.143.123.109 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article toAfD for community discussion. Thank you,SDPatrolBot (talk)20:53, 2 September 2009 (UTC)(Learn how to opt out of these messages)[reply]

Hi Joe407! It appears that you have not noticed my reply to your comment atTalk:Home Front Command. I would appreciate a reply, as I'm planning to merge the articles soon if no more arguments are presented, per appropriate policies. Cheers,Ynhockey^(Talk)14:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Joe, I'm actually not Chaim but a friend of the band who who bears the same surname. I totally understand were you are coming from and will do the best to shorten the article etc. However a complete deletion may be out of line as I wasn't really clear enough to describe what Scaje has accomplished. Some of the random facts I wrote were just to counter the quick deletion bot that claimed lack of significance. In essence I was just doing some truthful but unnecessary name dropping and I will edit the article accordingly. I will also take out most of the story-like quality that was in the article, I added it at one of the members requests. The band defiantly is on the rise (as you can imagine a balalaika stands out as unconventinal at these type of shows) they have a few early studio and live recordings that they pass around to friends etc. They aren't so into the whole commercial process as they say it takes the heart out of the music. If you want I can send you some of their material just for kicks. They defenitly have run Malva Malkas by themselves and were a staple at the Thursday night jams at the Holy Wall, which most American "Bochrim" are familiar with. If you are an Admin and have the will to remove the entry even after some friends and I clean up the page please give me some forewarning with a list of complaints anew. As for the Contemporary Jewish religious music article I am sorry about my haste and will try to clean it up ASAP. It would also be appciated if you do some work on the Chaim Dovid article if you are ready and able. B'hatlachaCysinger (talk)00:36, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for the tips etc. I am getting a better hang of the system and appreciate your help. Out of curiosity were did you get info on Shurin? Is there a Jewish music website that has good user bios/discographys that I would be able to use for Chaim Dovid or Sinia Tur or other Jewish artist that could use proper cred? Hope Scaje stays as it is a pet interest but I will accept the probable deletion if it comes.Cysinger (talk)01:03, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The articleBarkan mounts has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable company. SeeFind sources: Google (books ·news ·scholar ·free images ·WP refs) ·FENS ·JSTOR ·TWL. Only claim of notability is the "winning" of non-notable awards, which don't show up in a news archive search.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing{{dated prod}} will stop theProposed Deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. TheSpeedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andArticles for Deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion.^Bongo_matic03:44, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Bongomatic, I'm in no way married to the Barkan Mounts article. I created it after I noticed the products were in a lot of different places and it seemed a slightly interesting type of product. To my mind, the notability is their being one of only three or four manufacturers of a wide spread product more than the award. Imagine if there were only three companies that made household piping. I don't think they'd get much press but I feel they should be here in WP.

Two last thoughts. One, I don't think it needs to go but I will go back and read it again now. Two, perhaps it should be merged into the VESA article rather than deleted.Joe407 (talk)04:07, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I'd forgotten all about it. I've untagged it.Deb (talk)11:43, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed onA T.I.M.E. requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done undersection A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, 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 thecriteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Pleasesee the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specificnotability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see theArticle Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding{{hangon}} tothe top ofthe page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note onthe talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged forspeedy 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 contactone of these admins to request that theyuserfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.Ironholds (talk)18:25, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Joe407, I have granted rollback rights to your account in accordance with your request. Please be aware that rollback should be used to revert vandalism/spam/blatantly unconstructive edits, and that using it to revert anything else (by revert-warring or reverting edits you disagree with) can lead to it being removed from your account...sometimes without any warning, depending on the admin. For practice, you may wish to seeWikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. Good luck.Acalamari18:59, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

sorry but I don't have any sourcesNerguy (talk) 19:09, 1 October 2009 (UTC)at least not sources on the internet i heard it from someone who learnt with shwekey there.Nerguy (talk)19:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Having looked at the article again, I really can't see any claim to notability - being a rabbi and headmaster does not make someone notable. Ask the editor to create it in their userspace if they think it's worth pursuing. Cheers,пﮟოьεԻ5722:19, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK, the fact that the CSD was removed is irrelevant - only PRODS cannot be reinstated once removed.пﮟოьεԻ5713:03, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe, there is no conflict of interest here. I simply believe in doing things right and was able to do what I did with a lot of effort. Yes, I am diligent and like doing research.

This was my first experience with Wikipedia which explains why I made so many corrections. However, I truly enjoyed figuring out how to make it work. I felt like I was part of a detective story.

Thank you for contacting me.

Regards,

Stuartzs (talk)01:16, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Joe,

Do you have any idea how I could clean up the Mark Poznansky page? I continue to receive a cleanup warning. As mentioned earlier, I am new to the Wikipedia game, but am eager to learn.

Thanks

Stuartzs (talk)17:52, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I went to the links you sent me and have made a slew of changes. Yet I still get the cleanup warning. Have I not done enough?

Also, a question a protocol. I posted also posted my query to you on my user page. Should I be posting it there or simply on your user page?

Thanks for your help. I am new to this and trying to learn.Stuartzs (talk)00:29, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for cleaning up the article! I agree that many of the changes were definitely called for, but I did take the liberty of changingsome of the things back. I can't really spend time on it right now, but if you have any more comments, let me know. I also would like to know how to take the article off the peacock list, and if it's legitimately able to go off. Thanks again.Geshmakster (talk)00:24, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I think I'll put it on my watchlist to see what occurs on the page. Thanks for the feedback.Backtable^{Speak to Me}about what I have done02:10, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominatedA T.I.M.E., an article that you created, fordeletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/A T.I.M.E.. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.^Bongo_matic03:09, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In view ofthis diff, do you want to withdraw the Afd nomination?Debresser (talk)19:43, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Debresser you make no sense. If you want to write an article about law cases, go ahead, see how that fits into articles aboutFreedom of religion etc, but what difference does it make if there was a challenge in court to public menorahs, they are still regular menorahs and the topic, including information that that they were challenged in court, can be mentioned when inserting a section on menorahs in public as part of the regular mainMenorah (Hanukkah) article.IZAK (talk)08:32, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was an additional indication of notability for this subject. If it is notable, it may have its own article, after all.Debresser (talk)13:36, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm happy to host your debate, the AFD is the place for this back and forth.Joe407 (talk)16:43, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry.Debresser (talk)17:05, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since you have been kind enough to comment at the unresolvedWP:COI case atWikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/User:Yehoishophot Oliver, you may wish to know that it has now been nominated for arbitration. Feel free to review atWikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Chabad movement editors and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Requesting Arbitration;
• Wikipedia:Arbitration guide.

Thank you for your input and patience,IZAK (talk)09:22, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe: Since you have been involved in the topic ofChabad, this is to let you know that an official arbitration case has been opened atWikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Chabad movement. You may wish to add your comments for the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page,Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Chabad movement/Evidence. The ArbCom asks that evidence be submitted within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page,Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Chabad movement/Workshop. Thanks,IZAK (talk)06:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kol hakavod. I was too chicken to do it myself. --Ravpapa (talk)13:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• You're welcome.Joe407 (talk)18:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for saving me time to enhance the Bonei Olam article. I simply started it temporarily to eventually change its appearance etc. Interesting that I became a Wikipedian for the same purpose as you, to enrich Wikipedia with some vital Jewish non-profits in the makes ofBonei Olam. Looking forward to work with you on many new articles as well as editing existing ones (and there's lots of work on that). I believe that the Jewish organizations are not any less notable than other articles here on Wiki.GeredtErnst (talk)19:47, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please look atWikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Chabad movement/Evidence and rewrite/reformat as appropriate your evidence to answer Fritzpoll? Thanks.Dougweller (talk)18:17, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My practice with this sort of thing and culturall sections in general is as follows

• Chop anything which lacks an in line reference to an independentsource - that includes people and bands with just links to their own websites.
• Chop anything which does not appear to meetnotability guidleines, suitably adjusted to allow for the restrictions of this particular area.

The article as a whole is in need of a good clean up, lots ofWP:OR, unsourced etc.

I'm quite happy to swing the axe on the important people section if you don't want to upset other contributors yourself (:Jimfbleak - talk to me?17:47, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the offer. The reality is that on this topic not much has been written. The subject covers the past 50 years and hasn't gotten academic treatment. Part of why I don't want to play hatchet man is that I have (extensive) knowledge of the topic and a good amount of the OR is correct.  :( The arena that I feel is problematic is choosing who is considered a strong influence. BTW, I just glanced again at the article and there is a ton of linkspam that I'll try and chop. In short, any contributions you think are appropriate would be great. Especially if you can hunt down (even a few) sources about the musical style.Joe407 (talk)20:13, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look, but since I'm not Jewish, American, or a musician, I'm not exactly surrounded by relevant material {: I had a quick run through fixing some mos stuff (lead section shouldn't have a heading, definitions in lead, no questions as headers, and fixed redirects), but you're right about the linkspam.Jimfbleak - talk to me?07:01, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. I just looked back at your diffs. Very nice work.Joe407 (talk)09:00, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Joe - Thanks for the invite but I'm not anywhere near knowledgeable enough to comment on who is or isn't a notable Contemporary Jewish Religious Music artist. I assume you contacted me for my work onJohn Zorn and I would certainly think he is notable (but I'm biased) - considering the amount of output from theMasada Books that is based on Jewish music and other related projects such asKristallnacht (album) and the promotion of Jewish music throughTzadik Records. I'm not sure about the where he fits with the "religious" parameter but he has composed a peice based around the "Song of Songs" and another of his classical pieces has some basis in JRM but as he is a contemporary composer using elements you could argue that he is just as connected to JRM asMiles Davis &Gil Evans'sSketches of Spain isSpanish music.DISEman (talk)03:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just trying to come up with guidelines for musical influence notability. I've tried to post this RFC in many places and now tried turning to individual editors to help. I thought that with your music knowledge you could lend a hand even without knowing much about the specific style. Any help is appreciated. Thanks anyway,Joe407 (talk)05:15, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there Joe407, thank you for your contributions! I am abot alerting you thatNon-free files arenot allowed in the user or talk-space. Iremoved some images that I found onUser:Joe407/Aran Packaging. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use images to youruser-space drafts or yourtalk page. See a log of images removed todayhere, shutoff the bot here and report errorshere. Thank you, --DASHBot (talk)05:14, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe: A discussion has started if the Chabad editors case should be dismissed or should remain open. As someone who has been involved in the discussions leading up to this ArbCom case and presented evidence you should be informed of this motion and have the right to explain if you agree or disagree with this proposed motion and why. Please seeWikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Chabad movement/Evidence#Contemplated motion to dismiss. Thank you,IZAK (talk)06:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe, if you want to have a redirect deleted, then add the tag before the redirect. -Tbsdy (formerlyTa bu shi da yu)^talk08:50, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know if you'll see this post but that thanks for the welcome! That was pretty cool of you.Username4wiki (talk)04:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. There are so many new users who don't bother reading policies and such. It was nice to see that you did solid work and were not just pushing their agenda. Folks like you involved inWikipedia:WikiProject_Judaism are especially needed. Thanks again,Joe407 (talk)04:45, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it deserves to be there. Its rival,Jewish Week, has its sections listed on its wikipedia article. So Jewish Press should have it, too.—Precedingunsigned comment added byMazeartist (talk •contribs)15:47, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would you care to tell me why you systematically remove links I add? I have consulted the policy on links and I believe that these are justified and would benefit wiki users. Do you have an axe to grind?

Ahwikiman (talk)05:48, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adding an identical link in multiple articles is a large red-flag. It looks like you are trying to promote the DJSA. If you were linking each article to a specific page on the DJSA with that artist's work, I might agree with you. Instead you are dumping users on the DJSA homepage. This violatesWP:PROMO item #1 andWP:ELNO #4.

Does this sound reasonable to you?Joe407 (talk)06:21, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Joe407, Based on your comments, I have changed my input on Agunah. Please let me know if you think it should be cut down even more! I want to make this work!Floridarabbi (talk)23:03, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, please feel free to take it to deletion review; I couldn't really see any other way of closing it than NC, there are certainly problems with the article but it does appear to have a good amount of sourcing as well; it's a tricky one.Black Kite20:07, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joe407. You have new messages atJayjg's talk page.
Message added17:17, 14 March 2010 (UTC). You canremove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Jayjg^(talk)17:17, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Still needs some cleanup. Also, someone needs to check to see if the references actually provenotability. The creator still has obvious COI issues... - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk17:51, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Very true. Take a look at the article talk page.Talk:MultidarkJoe407 (talk)17:54, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's an autobiography, too.Woogee (talk)20:46, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

COI aside, I gave it a good shot at saving it. I then changed it from DB-ad to DB-person. I'd say give it a few hours for the author to respond and then kill it.Joe407 (talk)20:48, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It just looks like spam, to me. We'll see what happens.Woogee (talk)20:49, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing,Yan Katsnelson, has been listed fordeletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yan Katsnelson. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.Woogee (talk)06:10, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you establish a bit more of notability forSara Hurwitz as there isn't really anything special about her on first glance. If notability isn't established, it is at risk for being deleted. Thanks.Kevin Rutherford (talk)21:31, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominatedSara Hurwitz, an article that you created, fordeletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sara Hurwitz. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.Kevin Rutherford (talk)20:08, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Joe407. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion ofYeshiva Boys Choir, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern:A7 does not apply to redirects. Thank you.Tim Song (talk)07:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Joe407 -- I tried to develop the stub article on Srugim you created. Could you please take a look and see if enough has been done to remove the "wikify" banner and any other special notes? (The article still could be developed further, but now I think it's a "basic" article, since I added info, references, and external links. I just don't know if I'm allowed to remove any banners, or if only the person who put them there can do that.) Thanks!NearTheZoo (talk)03:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I added all of those names because they were on the reference that I used. I was am new to this and thought it was imperative to cite a source for reference. However, as to my opinion, I think that several important reform artists that were not included are Julie SIlver, Beth Schafer, Vocolot, Sue Horowitz, Sam Glaser, and Noam Katz. Again, this is only my personal opinon and reasonable people could certainly disagree as to whom should and should not be included.

Best of Luck,

Rwh1230 (talk)00:56, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominatedHebrew Academy for Special Children, an article that you created, fordeletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hebrew Academy for Special Children. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.—mono23:09, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I was just wondering why you deleted the link to the website of the Lander Investment Group from Lander College's page. Thanks.QueensQrew (talk)18:52, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

QueensQrew, If you readWP:EL, it explains what should and should not be linked and how to link to external pages. If the LIG was notable enough to have it's own WP entry (as perWP:N), you could put a link to their web site under "External Links". Given that it is only mentioned in the context of the Landers article, I felt it was not appropriate to put the link there.Joe407 (talk)04:49, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion has begun about whether the articleCountry Yossi, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in thedeletion policy.

The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Country Yossi until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.J04n(talk page)23:57, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe: Lately you have started pushing to eliminate or merge articles relating to topics in Judaism, such as your AfD atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Midrash Shmuel and at the discussion atTalk:Camp Moshava, Wild Rose, WI#Suggested move or delete and I am not sure if you are thinking through the ramifications and consequences of this type ofdeletionism[1]. While over the years I have nominated some topics for deletion myself, I am by nature an[2]inclusionist[3] and I hold very dearly to the principles of:

1. Wikipedia:Don't demolish the house while it's still being built: "An article too short to provide more than rudimentary information about a subject should be marked as a stub and edited, and expanded, rather than simply deleted."
2. Wikipedia:Give an article a chance: "Don't be too hasty in nominating newly-created articles for deletion..." -- and even if an article is older it still deserves a chance because building an encyclopedia byvolunteers takes time and WP is still less than a decade old!

So my heartfelt plea to you is that rather than hunt for articles to demolish, delete and merge, and go overboard withWP:LAWYERING (such as "...Abiding by the letter of apolicy or guideline while violating its spirit or underlying principles; Asserting that the technical interpretation ofWikipedia:Policies and guidelines should override the underlying principles they express; Misinterpreting policy or relying on technicalities to justify inappropriate actions") in defense of that strategy, try instead to find articles to improve, build-up and save and thereby help build the Judaic segments of Wikipedia that still need lots of help. You surely must understand by now that the challenges faced by Judaic editors on Wikipedia are unique because on the one hand Judaism has an old and rich literary tradition but on the other hand it is often very difficult to quickly find Internet-based sources at "cyber-speed" to build up perfectly valid articles. I hope I am managing to convey my thoughts to you on this serious matter. I look forward to hearing from you and sharing views with you. Thanks so much,IZAK (talk)04:09, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While I can see that the pictures removed are not absolutelyvital to the meaning of the article Tahash, they looked to me when I first saw them like they had been included as illustrations of the importance and dignity and cultural significance of the color indigo. The wealthy nomad was wearing indigo (I could more easily visualize the "desert chieftain's moveable pavilion or dwelling"), and the slippers on the feet of the woman were deep indigo like an illustration of the scriptures cited. Its like the previous editor was emphasizing the importance of this color, and illustrating the desert chieftain and the graceful feet of the queenly maiden (RSV). I came to the article about two months ago and got used to seeing them this past month of working on it to get it more balanced historically, so when they were gone I felt something like a sense of loss. I was curious after seeing the contents of your talk page if they were offensive to you in some way. If so, I can understand that, and I support your decision. I already said on the talk page that the article contains something to offend almost everyone. (I was offended by the "beaded skins", but I also included a couple images of beads for that part of the article.) I do think you left the good stuff.Stay safe. --Michael Paul Heart (talk)09:02, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Michael, I was/am in no way offended by the photos I removed. I just found them unnecessary to the article and they do not add anything of content. You have done yeoman's work on the article and I commend you. At this point it need alot of work in editing it down so that it is clear and concise. I hope to do some editing in that direction and look forward to working with you so that no content is lost and clarity is gained.Joe407 (talk)10:11, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hoo-Rah! I'm glad to hear it. I'm about finished with what I set out to do. The little external links that appear only as numbers I'm going to revise with Paleo-Hebrew characters, and that is about all I have left in mind now. You have my heart-felt support. --Michael Paul Heart (talk)16:27, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just completed my final finishing edit on Tahash. That doesn't mean I won't check it from time to time. We're good to go. Keep in touch. --Michael Paul Heart (talk)20:34, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to add (see my comments at Tahash talk page) that I think it's very interesting that the Sages (Baba Metzia) said that the techalet from the hillazon was identical in color to the indigo dye of the indigofera tinctoria, and that this color was midnight blue-black. Since this is an undisputed fact, according to the Sages, and from this fact we know the real color (if not the tone) of the actual tekhelet blue, I really think that this point should be retained, especially since the deepest, richest, darkest indigo was regarded as the most significant and suitable color for authority and for bestowing respect and reverence on the great and the sacred and the holy. --Michael Paul Heart (talk)06:32, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like great information to add atTechelet. Why add it toTahash? Also, let's keep these discussions on the article talk page. If you want me to address a particular comment, please use a talkback template.Joe407 (talk)07:35, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now that honestly,truly sounds like a good idea! Really like it.I hope you can pull it off! I would like to see it done so that the reader will consult "Tekhelet" (wiki's favorite spelling!) Thanks for the insight!Michael Paul Heart (talk)12:25, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go ahead and transfer what I said here, above, to the article talk page (good idea!), but right now I have to go to work. So be patient. Keep in touch.Michael Paul Heart (talk)12:30, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If I remember right, you and Pontificalibus can construct a new article in the sandbox, work on it as you are able, and when it's finished you can transfer it to the live Wikipedia. Check it out! Good luck! --Michael Paul Heart (talk)03:18, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

הַנֵּרוֹת הַלָּלוּ קֹדֶשׁ הֵם

Hi Yossi! Hoping you and yours arespiritually warmed by the holy lights of
חֲנֻכָּה

Chesdovi2010

Please see this edit:[4]

Explanation provided at:[5]184.48.93.218 (talk)04:45, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I give up for now, I'd hoped to cut out anything not supported by secondary sources before building the article up again, but he's being so intransigent I can see my contributions ceasing to be constructive. Hopefully other editors can be found to help out with that article. I posted it toWP:NORN. --Pontificalibus (talk)19:36, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the effort. There are a few things I'd still like to do but I don't have time/strength to fightWP:OWN.Joe407 (talk)10:42, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't stay away for long. You might be interested inthis chapter I just found, which I guess we could cite in a few places in the article. --Pontificalibus (talk)14:06, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe, I hope you don't think I'm tailing you! I was just looking at the history of this page after I expanded it and discovered that you moved it to userspace today! I found the article through the link you added toMidrash Shmuel Yeshiva, and decided to look for more sources. Thanks for putting up the page. Best,Yoninah (talk)21:46, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joe407. You have new messages atWikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools.
Message added 20:47, 5 March 2011 (UTC). You canremove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The proper place to discuss a particular category is at WP:CAT, not on the various talk page you posted on. Moreover, if you have a problem with a specific set of edits, as you obviously do with my recent edits, the polite thing to do is to bring it to my attention rather than blanket reverting and violatingWP:BLP by readding challenged material. I suggest you reread the policies regarding biographies of living people. Thanks--TM05:03, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The two questions I have on your set of edits are: 1) How do you define "Israeli Settler"? I always thought that in the same way that a New Yorker is someone who hails from or currently lives in New York, an Israeli settler would be someone who hails from or currently lives in an Israeli settlement.Larry Domnitch grew up in NYC and currently lives in Miami. Is he a Coloradoan because he taught high school in Denver like he did in Efrat? I'd ask the same question regardingShlomo Katz who grew up in LA and lives in Jerusalem. Yes, he studied in a settlement. I did a semester of university in Sydney - does that make me Australian?

The second question is what is the goal of the category of "Israeli Settler"? I feel that it implies a political POV commonality to people in the category. In order to make a statement about a person's political views you need a source. The term "Israeli settler" is, in today's political world, a charged term and as such should not be applied to BLPs without a source to that effect. If your intent is purely to indicate location, perhaphs a more neutral wording of the category is appropriate. For example:Category:People from New Jersey. What are your thoughts?Joe407 (talk)12:15, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Generally speaking, the inclusion of a category is useful when it tells us something non-trivial about a subject, perWP:CAT. I think that anyone who lived in a settlement is a settler. The goal of the category is to allow people to easily search for those who lived in Israeli settlements, just like every other category. So you would preferCategory:People from Israeli settlements?--TM14:17, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would I preferCategory:People from Israeli settlements? Yes. It is a more neutral statement. As to who qualifies, how is living in a settlement different than living in New York or Zambia in terms of being considered "from there"?Joe407 (talk)14:19, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See, I do not think it is better, which is why I did not use it. EvenIsraeli settlement says "As of 2009, the total number of Israeli settlers was 516569", not "516569 people are from Israeli settlements". See the difference? It is subtle but important. Also, there is no need to leave a talkback on my page since I am watching this page. The definition of being "from" somewhere is indeed difficult on Wikipedia. Being born somewhere is a definite, but the other qualification, which tends to mean spending "significant" time somewhere, is up for debate.--TM14:32, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to be faithful to the linked text and just assumed that we should not correct it because it's that way in the source. I had considered "and it bad[sic] one horn", but didn't because the linked text already had brackets in it. For the sake of accuracy, removal of distraction, and the original source you cited, I agree with your correction and appreciate your explanation from the Hebrew text. I made my explanation here because the relatively minor issue of the source-text's typo doesn't seem to apply to Talk Page "Improvements to the Article". Should the link in the article be made to the online source you referred to in your edit summary instead of to the newpdf? --Michael Paul Heart (talk)15:13, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that a source like the Talmud needs an online link as it is a widely available reference book. Linking to an online translation is purely as a convenience and should not be seen as authoritative in the face of the original text.Joe407 (talk)18:14, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

—And I don't think most readers will notice anyway. Thanks. --Michael Paul Heart (talk)18:35, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the cookie!Yoninah (talk)11:27, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Joe, I remembered your supportive input on the talk page provided for me by Wikipedia. I had no intention of doing anything else on Wikipedia, and I declined the invitation at that time. But a few days ago I saw what was happening atArk of the Covenant Talk Page and I provided a response from a Jewish point of view. Take a look. You have been here a long while. Maybe you can offer some useful input on the matter that will matter. I apparently did not. For my own peace of mind I hope not to return. I think it would be best. שלם --BenjaminDavidAharonDvi (talk)07:58, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This editor blocked as a sock ofUser:Michael Paul Heart (above).Dougweller (talk)17:33, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I had an idea to rename category "Mishna rabbis" to "Tannanim", and it isn't going down well with the boss. If you have any constructive thoughts on the matter, please enlighten us as Rabbis categories for renaming at WPJ. Much obliged, as always.Chesdovi (talk)15:53, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi- you tagged the Bnei Akiva page with "peacock terms" (quite a while ago). Can you either remove the tag, or specify what the terms in the current page are that you find questionable? Thanks --Sreifa (talk)11:31, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thank you for noticing.Joe407 (talk)11:40, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would gladly help improve thearticle.
  –HonorTheKing (talk)08:00, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joe407. You have new messages atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yaheh Hallegua.
Message added 08:45, 3 June 2011 (UTC). You canremove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Glad you enjoyed the article.

Question re: the removal of the references. The references to DJSA and FAU Jewish Sound Archives were meaningful in that their multiple pages on the Rabbis' Sons provided information mentioned in the main body of the article. Please be specific as to whichexternal link guidelines were violated.

Please suggest how the information above should be conveyed without forcing Wikipedia readers to view pages on individual albums in order to see the DJSA and FAU references.— Precedingunsigned comment added byTochnit9 (talk •contribs)17:12, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification, and for taking the initiative to start the discussion.Roscelese (talk ⋅contribs)01:39, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in thissecond-time AFD nomination forChaverim (volunteers). Best,Yoninah (talk)18:47, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Joe, I got a message from Drmies that said he had reverted all the material I had retrieved from earlier versions of the article, and that his reasons were given on theTachash talk page. I went to the talk page, but I found nothing submitted by him. He didn't give any reasons. I had retrieved and restored only the info that had solid reliable verifiable cited sources, but I left out the OR junk written and submitted by Hermitstudy and Michael Paul Heart. You said I had done a good job of it. I've read the Tachash talk page archives and his objections there, and I don't really see how they apply to the material retrieved and restored the past 6 weeks. He said the material is "eerily familiar". Of course it is, since it comes from the earlier versions, but I didn't write it. It's only the solid information without any OR, info which has reputable verifiable sources (I checked 'em—that was a part of my job, before I retired). He hasn't actually given any reasons for the revert. What do you think? --LittleOldManRetired (talk)04:20, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My recommendation is to stop editing the article for the moment. Allow the page to be reverted to the revision DrMies wants. This is a show of good faith and a willingness to work with other editors. After you have done this, request a third opinion regarding both the sockpuppetry claim and regarding the revisions you would like to make for this article. I know that this seems extreme but due to the issues that this article has had with the editors Hermitstudy and Michael Paul Heart, I feel this is the best was to gain consensus regarding the changes you would like to make to this article.Joe407 (talk)18:42, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Joe, please see the ANI thread on this topic. Thank you,Drmies (talk)22:33, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the thread after I posted my response. When he started editing the article again I was a bit suspicious but was so burnt out from last time that I just ignored it and left him alone as he seemed very polite. The similar content and the "Hoo-Ah's" seemed suspicious but the politeness was a vast improvement so I let him be. One day, someone who cares will sort through his junk and find what it really worth saving.Joe407 (talk)03:22, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I feel bad for you because you have invested a lot of time and energy in this article/editor. That's part of what makes this so frustrating, sometimes.Drmies (talk)04:52, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joe407. You have new messages atSteven J. Anderson's talk page.
You canremove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

• And see "And we're back, at Talk:Tachash" on that same user talk page, where I posted before I saw your message. I've added him toWikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hermitstudy, along with the well-known Michael Paul Heart IP (seeTalk:Tachash).Drmies (talk)04:51, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hey, please don't insult the senior citizens. There's no point in it. Also, I've blocked them for block evasion: they quack like a duck.Drmies (talk)05:17, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shalom Joe, What do you think of the recent edits in the Hebrew aericle? Thanks,Happy138 (talk)09:44, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They seem reasonable, balanced coverage of recent events. I think that the publicity is good for the organization and for us at WP we now have more RS to improve the article with. I am a bit short on time these days so I don't know if I will incorporate this new material into the article or if I will leave it for someone else.Joe407 (talk)10:25, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The trouble is that websites tend not to use the same spellings as WP:RS academic print sources. I've noted on article's talk page to search for several other spellings. Cheers. Will probably need a page move when its settled down.In ictu oculi (talk)06:51, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see nobody offered to help...In ictu oculi (talk)04:47, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I gave it a shot at editing the article away from the haiographic phrasing and storytelling that is the sources used (Tzemach Dovid and Hanoch Teller, etc). I did the first three sections on the biography. if you want to try the other three that would be great. But the problem remains that the sources used are not particularly high quality but rather are personal recollections or written out mesorah of a yeshiva community. I posted on WP:JUDAISM in the hope that people would have "real" sources. I do not have at my disposal. If you do that would be even better than my attempts to fix poorly worded text. Thanks for your interest and assistance.Joe407 (talk)06:01, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In case it's no longer on your watch list, this is just to let you know that I've reopened the discussion atTalk:Israel national football team#Redirect from History of the Israel national football team. I feel the destiny of the History article needs to be decided one way or another. (I'm sending this to all three people who took part in last year's discussion). Best regards, --Stfg (talk)13:44, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I haven't logged in to Wikipedia in over two years, but in doing so now I saw I had a message from you. You were very friendly, but said my edit of the 'NCSY' page (where I added the names of two of the original founders that had been left off) was considered "vandalism." You referred me tot he wikipedia page about "vandalism" and it says something about a deliberate attempt to undermine the integrity of the Encyclopedia.

So my question is: where is your logic? And what are contributors supposed to do if not correct mistakes by adding factual information? How does that destroy the integrity of this thing?

What a discouraging practice.

Four ~ eh? How intuitive.

Jtk141 (talk)14:37, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Welcome back! I think I see what happened. You made this edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=NCSY&diff=prev&oldid=339836244) and afterwards there were a number of edits that were clearly vandals (NCSY did not win a Grammy for Best Song in 2006). You can flip through these edits from the link above and clicking "next edit". I reverted the edit back to an earlier version and placed a welcome message on your talk page. I did not differentiate between your edit and those that followed and I apoloigize. You edit was not vandalism. However, your edit did not cite a source. If you look atWP:RS you will see how Wikipedia requires sourcing for material. If you can cite your material and add it back in that would be great. The NCSY article need a lot of work and any assistance you can give in cleaning it up, adding sources, or clarifying language would be great because it sound like you know if from the inside. Please let me know if I can help with anything else.Joe407 (talk)04:44, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the article. Could you flesh out the Eliezer reference details?

—Lgfcd (talk)13:12, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleYaheh Hallegua is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.

The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yaheh Hallegua (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.bender235 (talk)10:09, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the currentArbitration Committee election. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipediaarbitration 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome toreview the candidates' statements and submit your choices onthe voting page. For the Election committee,MediaWiki message delivery (talk)14:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the currentArbitration Committee election. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipediaarbitration 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome toreview the candidates' statements and submit your choices onthe voting page. For the Election committee,MediaWiki message delivery (talk)14:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joe407. Voting in the2016 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.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please reviewthe candidates' statements and submit your choices onthe voting page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joe407. Voting in the2017 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.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed onUser:Joe407/Aran Packaging requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done undersection U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note thatWikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under thecriteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you maycontest the nomination byvisiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line withWikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact thedeleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a requesthere.—Compassionate727 ^(T·C)20:27, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia 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 imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:21, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a while, Joe407!Drmies (talk)13:55, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies a solid 3 years or more. I'm between jobs at the moment and was burning time by doing old cleanup tasks.

when I logged back in, I saw I had a mention. which led to me wasting an hour or so building an article for Tachash that wasn't the crazy amount of OR one from way back when.

at this point I have a pretty reasonable draft which if you are okay looking at, I'd love your feedback.

I also tried moving it into main space and hit some technical snag. maybe you could see what I'm doing wrong with that as well?Joe407 (talk)14:03, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, welcome back. Well there's a protected redirect there I think, maybe that's it? I can't do anything right now but I think it's probably best to just submit it as a draft--there's a few MOS things that need to be ironed out, but there also seems to be a lot of primary sourcing. If the AfC reviewer accepts it they can figure out how to move it. Take care,Drmies (talk)15:37, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]