Forgot to cross out that comment as well, sorry Tzu Zha Men. |
Breein1007 (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
::Neve Ativ didn't even exist until 1972. Who are you? Why are you even editing this article when you obviously don't know anything about the subject?--[[User:Supreme Deliciousness|Supreme Deliciousness]] ([[User talk:Supreme Deliciousness|talk]]) 20:33, 11 November 2009 (UTC) |
::Neve Ativ didn't even exist until 1972. Who are you? Why are you even editing this article when you obviously don't know anything about the subject?--[[User:Supreme Deliciousness|Supreme Deliciousness]] ([[User talk:Supreme Deliciousness|talk]]) 20:33, 11 November 2009 (UTC) |
||
:::There's no need for that tone or language. Make comments related to the issue, not the editor. [[User:Tzu Zha Men|Tzu Zha Men]] ([[User talk:Tzu Zha Men|talk]]) 20:52, 11 November 2009 (UTC) |
:::There's no need for that tone or language. Make comments related to the issue, not the editor. [[User:Tzu Zha Men|Tzu Zha Men]] ([[User talk:Tzu Zha Men|talk]]) 20:52, 11 November 2009 (UTC) |
||
:Supreme Deliciousness, as usual you are using unreliable sources. As a matter of fact, I don't know if it's a problem on my end, but the links you've used here are dead. Either way, the source is not reliable and unless you can provide appropriate sources of information for the article, it should be reverted to the previous state.[[User:Breein1007|Breein1007]] ([[User talk:Breein1007|talk]]) 07:14, 12 November 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 07:14, 12 November 2009
Jubata Ez-Zeit
There is currently a separate article for Jubata Ez-Zeit. I have taken some content from that article and added it to this one. Neve Ativ occupies the same location as Jubata Ez-Zeit did, and only a few years separate the destruction of one and the founding of the the other. So there should be information about Jubata Ez-Zeit in this article. I also think it is hard to make a legitimate case for having two separate articles. If it were otherwise, there would be multiple articles for every town or village that has ever seen a population change or a name-change or a short break in settlement continuity. Meowy 16:05, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- It is also normal to give former place-names for a settlement, so my addition of the words "formerly Jubata Ez-Zeit" is correct. Meowy 16:22, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Meowy, you dont know what you are doing, "Jubata Ez-Zeit" was a Syrian village, it was destroyed and its population removed. The israeli settlement built on the same land as it has no connection to it. Neve Ativ has never been "formerly Jubata Ez-Zeit" I had one sentence linked to the other article and that was enough. You have copied the info to try to get the other one deleted. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 16:37, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Without speculating on the motivation of Meowy, I agree with Supreme D that Neve Ativ has never been "formerly Jubata Ez-Zeit". Tzu Zha Men (talk) 17:17, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Please see Villages that occupy the same location?. Chesdovi (talk) 17:27, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks, I commented there. Tzu Zha Men (talk) 17:41, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Please see Villages that occupy the same location?. Chesdovi (talk) 17:27, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Without speculating on the motivation of Meowy, I agree with Supreme D that Neve Ativ has never been "formerly Jubata Ez-Zeit". Tzu Zha Men (talk) 17:17, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Meowy, you dont know what you are doing, "Jubata Ez-Zeit" was a Syrian village, it was destroyed and its population removed. The israeli settlement built on the same land as it has no connection to it. Neve Ativ has never been "formerly Jubata Ez-Zeit" I had one sentence linked to the other article and that was enough. You have copied the info to try to get the other one deleted. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 16:37, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
"Without speculating on the motivation of Meowy" - what a pathetic comment to make. I wonder what sort of unholy, perverse, freak-of-nature alliance will evolve to oppose me if I persist in editing this article like it were any other Wikipedia article, since I assume both "sides" have their vested interests in POV-warring "Arab-Israeli-conflict" articles into forms not seen on other Wikipedia articles. In "normal" wikipedia articles, it is the location of a settlement that is its defining characteristic, not its name or its ethnic makeup or the specific structures within the settlement. We are not talking about an ancient city and a modern settlement, we are talking about the same settlement but with a population and name change. Meowy 18:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Coudl you be anuy more insulting?I made that comment to calrify that I don't agree with the statement that you are editing here in order to get thew other article deleted. We are not, howver, talking about the same settlment. We are talking about a new settlement, which may partially overlap some of the lands of the previous one (a fact which has noit been established by the way). Tzu Zha Men (talk) 18:37, 11 November 2009 (UTC)I guess I could be more insulting if you were to give me some tips - you seem adept at giving insults. However, I suggest that in future you assume good faith and resist writing weasily "speculating on the motivation" comments about editors.Meowy 19:20, 11 November 2009 (UTC)Do you hasve a reading comprehension problem?Another editor was speculating on your motives. I distanced myself from that speculation, and you find that insulting? Whatever.. Tzu Zha Men (talk) 19:56, 11 November 2009 (UTC)- Sorry, you interupted my process of editing my earlier comment. Meowy 20:06, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- ..and I then lost the ammended edit somehow! I was going to say that your "speculating on the motivation" comment did sound decidedly weasily, and as such I felt it was worse than Supreme Deliciousness's one because he/she, though wrong in his/her "speculation", was at least up-front about it. You say you actually meant it to be something like "Supreme Deliciousness, don't speculate on the motivation of Meowy" - but that is not what you actually wrote, so I was entitled to take your words at face value. But I accept that is not actually what you meant and have struck out my earlier comment. I would appreciate you striking out your "Coudl you be anuy more insulting" and "Do you hasve a reading comprehension problem?" comments, since it was your initial vaguely-worded comment that started this. Meowy 20:15, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- I appreciate you sriking out the previous comment (and have done the same). I can see how my previous note might have been misinterpreted. To make things clear- I am not speculating on your motivation, and I don't think Supreme should, either. I do agree with them, though, that Jubata is nor a former name for Neve Ativ. Tzu Zha Men (talk) 20:29, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- ..and I then lost the ammended edit somehow! I was going to say that your "speculating on the motivation" comment did sound decidedly weasily, and as such I felt it was worse than Supreme Deliciousness's one because he/she, though wrong in his/her "speculation", was at least up-front about it. You say you actually meant it to be something like "Supreme Deliciousness, don't speculate on the motivation of Meowy" - but that is not what you actually wrote, so I was entitled to take your words at face value. But I accept that is not actually what you meant and have struck out my earlier comment. I would appreciate you striking out your "Coudl you be anuy more insulting" and "Do you hasve a reading comprehension problem?" comments, since it was your initial vaguely-worded comment that started this. Meowy 20:15, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, you interupted my process of editing my earlier comment. Meowy 20:06, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Meowy you have in the article written that Neve Ativ is "formerly Jubata Ez-Zeit" You have not provided one single source for this claim. You are making stuff up. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Are you denying that the settlement called Neve Ativ was called Jubata Ez-Zeit before 1968? Meowy 20:27, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Neve Ativ didn't even exist until 1972. Who are you? Why are you even editing this article when you obviously don't know anything about the subject?--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:33, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- There's no need for that tone or language. Make comments related to the issue, not the editor. Tzu Zha Men (talk) 20:52, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Neve Ativ didn't even exist until 1972. Who are you? Why are you even editing this article when you obviously don't know anything about the subject?--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:33, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Supreme Deliciousness, as usual you are using unreliable sources. As a matter of fact, I don't know if it's a problem on my end, but the links you've used here are dead. Either way, the source is not reliable and unless you can provide appropriate sources of information for the article, it should be reverted to the previous state.Breein1007 (talk) 07:14, 12 November 2009 (UTC)