User talk:إيان

I have replied on my talk page… continue there if need be. Blueboar (talk) 20:46, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, can you please self-revert your most recent changes to others comments?

All you have to do is ping the author and request their permission before doing format edits like this. They will very likely say yes, but the policy does require that you first ask permission. Mikewem (talk) 17:05, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Mikewem, I have already explained to you that what you keep calling comments are not comments—comments have WP:Signatures—and the sourcing subsection is not a discussion section. I created the sourcing subsection as a way to organize and keep track of the WP:BESTSOURCES cited in the discussion. It's simply a list of sources, not a place for comment. Managing a list of sources is not changing others' comments. In fact, I was the one who added Boutboul's own entries that I had struck out earlier for not mentioning the topic at all, so I would be editing my own "comment" if we were to apply your logic.

Regarding your diffs, is it your impression that the list of sources is more useful organized randomly, with Boutboul inserting sources in the middle, than chronologically by publication date, which assists us in assessing the BESTSOURCES with regard to WP:AGEMATTERS? Is it your opinion that the list is more navigable and organized with some quotations collapsed and others embedded in the bibliographic information? إيان (talk) 18:04, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Are you refusing to cease editing other’s comments in an apparent violation of TPO? Mikewem (talk) 18:08, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

I'll ask an administrator. إيان (talk) 18:09, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Done. إيان (talk) 18:16, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Mikewem, in the meantime, if you could address the questions, that would be great. إيان (talk) 18:10, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

First we’ll clarify the conduct question , then after that is settled, we’ll clarify the content question Mikewem (talk) 18:36, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Deal. إيان (talk) 18:37, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

As there hasn’t yet been a response, shall we seek clarification on organizing and maintaining a list of BESTSOURCES in an RfC from Wikipedia talk:RfC? إيان (talk) 05:40, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Mikewem? إيان (talk) 04:59, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

That sounds reasonable to me, thanks for suggesting this Mikewem (talk) 05:05, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

This page is on my watchlist, so I saw this and felt compelled to point out that the "comments" Mikewem is referring to, and which إيان collapsed, should not be entered in the "quote" parameter of ref templates. They are not "quotes" of the source text, but are commentary by a user, and therefore are misplaced in that parameter. The "quote" parameter is only for actual quotes from the source. Every experienced editor should know this. Carlstak (talk) 21:34, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Carlstak, thank you for speaking up now, though you could have done it then too 😜 إيان (talk) 22:46, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Where do you mean? I first saw this here, and responded immediately. Correcting formatting mistakes by an editor who misuses the "quote" parameter of refs is obviously not a violation of WP:TPO. I'll leave a note on Materialscientist's talk page. Where else should I make a statement? This complaint is a timewaster, and I'm trying to work on composing content for an article. Carlstak (talk) 23:06, 5 April 2026

Oh, sorry I thought you meant you had the article talk page on your watchlist. You don't have to do anything—thank you though. I'll ask for clarification at Wikipedia Talk:RfC because I'd like to have a better sense of best practices for this sort of thing. Happy composing. إيان (talk) 00:20, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

I didn’t notice any non-quotes in the quote parameter. I definitely don’t see anything that stands out to me as user commentary. I must be missing something. If there is user commentary being presented as authentic quotes, that’s a big deal to me. Mikewem (talk) 20:56, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

@Carlstak: do you mean that the quote parameter shouldn’t be used to quote from a published abstract? I thought those abstracts are written by the original authors and are part of the work, though I could be wrong. Mikewem (talk) 21:01, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

I checked a few of these yesterday while in the middle of my own research for an article, and found these two citations right off the bat that appear to have non-quotes in the quote parameter:

Jason A. Staples, "Paul and the Resurrection of Israel": "the distinction between these terms is rooted in the biblical distinction between Israel and Judah, with "Jews" a subset of the larger category of "Israel", a label also claimed by Samaritans (who were not Jews)."

Jason A. Staples, "The Idea of Israel in Second Temple Judaism: A New Theory of People, Exile, and Israelite Identity": "That is, "Jew" continues to refer to the subset of Israel specifically derived from the kingdom of Judah either by descent, marriage, or (eventually) conversion.

I just checked a few more, as I have access to all the academic sites through the Wikipedia Library (the OUP publications are temporarily unavailable), and they look legit. I don't have time to check all of the many cites—perhaps you could, or better yet, the editor who added them would be likely to know which aren't actual quotes. I will also say that some of the quoted excerpts from the abstracts of the essays are so long that they appear to constitute copyvio and should be shortened in any case. Carlstak (talk) 22:46, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

The parenthetical comments are from the source, not any Wikipedia editor. Staples likes using parentheses. I’m not sure I have the timeline completely right here. This whole thing was just to compile a list of sources to analyze what best sources might look like. Originally, I believe short quotes were presented in the quote field as would be expected, and some full abstracts and extended quotes were presented in an extended content collapsed section. Then, after striking some contributions to the list and declining to self-revert those strikes, إيان decided to make all the formats of every ref match the way they formatted their own contributions to the list, and moved all short quotes from the quote parameter into collapsed extended content sections, and has so far declined to self revert that unusual formatting change. Mikewem (talk) 16:45, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

I'll let you guys hash that out (which you were in the process of doing, I think). I responded here because in my editing I encounter a good bit of material presented as "quotation", enclosed in quote marks, that is in reality no such thing, and taking a look at the disputed talk page content it looked like some of that might have been going on there. The citations with excessive quotes of the sources need to be shortened–they are copyvio, I'm pretty sure. Carlstak (talk) 16:58, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

I think إيان is the only one who quoted full abstracts, obviously I would have no issue with them editing their own ref.

Either way, I don’t think Materialscientist has any interest in this, but just for the sake of posterity, could you add some text to the thread on their talk page to clarify that all quotes in question are legit?

And thanks for your work keeping quotes on the up and up. Mikewem (talk) 17:34, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

I don't find either of those quotations in the cited Staples works. For example, in Paul and the Resurrection of Israel: Jews, Former Gentiles, Israelites, page 52, he writes; "[...] Josephus carries forward the biblical distinction between these terms and explains that they have a partitive relationship, with Jews a subset of the larger category of Israel". Boutboul gives this supposed quote of Staples' book: "the distinction between these terms is rooted in the biblical distinction between Israel and Judah, with "Jews" a subset of the larger category of "Israel," a label also claimed by Samaritans (who were not Jews)." These words do not appear in the book.

Boutboul also gives this supposed quote of Staples' essay "The Idea of Israel in Second Temple Judaism": "That is, "Jew" continues to refer to the subset of Israel specifically derived from the kingdom of Judah either by descent, marriage, or (eventually) conversion." I downloaded Staples' essay "The Idea of Israel in Second Temple Judaism" and a control-f search doesn't show a single instance of the word "subset". Boutboul appears to be paraphrasing, and these supposed "quotes" therefore would be original research, and misrepresented as quotes. All of the citations would be easier to check for veracity if page numbers were given. Carlstak (talk) 18:22, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

They’re quotes from the abstracts at Researchgate. As I said, I’ve assumed authors write these abstracts, but I do not know. Mikewem (talk) 18:36, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Quotes from abstracts at Researchgate don't count as "quotes" of the cited sources. Those abstracts are not present in either of these Staples' works as cited—the Cambridge Core page as cited doesn't even have an abstract per se, in lieu of that, it has a "description", which doesn't contain the quote. I'm done here. Carlstak (talk) 18:51, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Then this should be fixed, thanks for your help. Mikewem (talk) 18:53, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

The second temple one is from pg 340. It does look like Boutboul editorialized by writing “conversion” instead of “proselytism/conversion”. That should be fixed. Mikewem (talk) 18:52, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Join Wikimedia NYC tomorrow for Wiki-Play Friday (2-6pm, drop-in whenever) on April 10, a pop-up exhibition and laboratory of wiki-based immersive design gaming at the World Trade Center Oculus in Lower Manhattan: Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Wiki-Play Fridays (Luma RSVP) Next week on Thu April 16 at CUNY City Tech in Downtown Brooklyn (12:30-4pm): RSVP required for CUNY building entry on April 16 And the last Wednesday evening of the month, WikiWednesday makes its glorious return to Prime Produce on West 54th Street in Hell's Kitchen: Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/April 2026

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:59, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

More information April 29: WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce ...

April 29: WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our WikiWednesday Salon at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan, with an online-based participation option also available. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome! Featuring this salon, a facilitated discussion on Wikidata, notability, and GLAM! All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Photography Policy. Meeting info: Wednesday, April 29 WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce (optional RSVP on-wiki). 6:00 pm – 7:00 pm (Open Hour) 7:00 pm – 9:00 pm (Wiki Salon) (Prime Produce, Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan) Also online via Zoom

Close

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:14, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Weaponization of antisemitism, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 21:48, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Not a good idea to change it with no edit summary in the middle of a talk discussion, 48 hours after your last revert. You've been here long enough to know that. GordonGlottal (talk) 01:08, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

My bad on forgetting the edit summary but I left a note in the discussion so it’s not like I was trying to be inconspicuous or anything. The essay on the BRD cycle is clear on attempting changes as discussion progresses, and my edit was radically different from the version that you reverted the other day and it clearly took input in the discussion into account—so AGF my brother. إيان (talk) 01:33, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Redirects you have created have been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 5 § Bilingual redirects with an Arabic-script language until a consensus is reached. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:24, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Please stop implying bias; if you don't, someone will eventually take this ""POV"" you have about WP:PA to AE. NorthernWinds ❄️ (talk) 09:16, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

NorthernWinds, could you please explain more fully what you think the problem is? إيان (talk) 13:48, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

since it appears to be your personal POV implies that I based my comment on bias, not sources. NorthernWinds ❄️ (talk) 14:47, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Did I say "POV" or did I say "bias"? Was "why make it political" based on sources? إيان (talk) 14:58, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

"POV" is used interchangeably with "bias" on Wikipedia; it alludes to WP:NPOV. Was "why make it political" based on sources? yes (check linked source) NorthernWinds ❄️ (talk) 15:16, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

It's unclear how Harvey Sicherman's book Palestinian Autonomy, Self-Government, & Peace from 1993 (your linked source) is meant to support the idea that it is "political" to address Zionism in discussion of migration to Palestine in the Israel subsection of the article Ashkenazi Jews, but to omit Zionism from that section is somehow not "political". That is the argument, that it is "political" to include it but not "political" to exclude it, that I said appeared to be your personal point of view. إيان (talk) 15:38, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

This was not my argument... I was commenting on describing the immigration as political. Perhaps we've had a misunderstanding. NorthernWinds ❄️ (talk) 15:45, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

For reference, here's the exchange:

@إيان The correct question would be to ask why make it political when it was not political back then. Zionism was not even a political movement in the period in question. NorthernWinds ❄️ (talk) 22:31, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

NorthernWinds, since it appears to be your personal POV that adding the consensus understanding of the migration of European Jewry to Palestine is to make it political—what makes you believe that choosing to omit this information is not itself political? إيان (talk) 01:49, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

It's my ""POV"" that RS say that Political Zionism was founded suddenly in 1897, which is after 1880.

From your POV, do you see them saying something else? Maybe I'm reading it upside down or something. Please enlighten me!

From my POV, I see that your source says that ideologically driven by Zionist or proto-Zionist sentiments and that it does not say anything about politics. Do you see, from your POV, the word "political" or a similar derived term being used in that source to describe all or most migrations? NorthernWinds ❄️ (talk) 09:15, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

I believe I made myself sufficiently clear. إيان (talk) 15:55, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

This excerpt still makes perfect sense as I interpreted it. NorthernWinds ❄️ (talk) 16:42, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Unless I am mistaken, I have described content, not a contributor—this does not constitute a WP:personal attack. (And if there were something wrong in the comment you linked in the text "implying bias" above, how would it be different from your comment after?)

Please also be aware of WP:INTIMIDATE. إيان (talk) 14:43, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

WP:PA lists Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence (which is what I understood from your comment)

My later comment is making use of "POV" in a literal sense, as in literal point of view (hence Maybe I'm reading it upside down or something)

I do not mean to WP:INTIMIDATE; I did not suggest that I will do it (I also don't plan on doing it). NorthernWinds ❄️ (talk) 14:54, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

NorthernWinds, please help me understand: if I use the word "POV" it's an "accusation about personal behavior that lacks evidence," one grave enough to bring you to my talk page to warn me that someone will eventually take this ""POV"" you have about WP:PA to AE, but if you use the word "POV", it's "in a literal sense, as in literal point of view"—what's the difference? إيان (talk) 15:03, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

The difference is that I used it literally (as in literal point of view, like standing in the north and the south of a building and having a different point of view on the building, or in our case, the text.) NorthernWinds ❄️ (talk) 15:20, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Also looking back I think I reacted too harshly but my original point still stands - you should be more careful NorthernWinds ❄️ (talk) 15:23, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

We used the exact same word. You say my use of it is "implying bias" but apparently yours isn't; you say your use is "as in a literal point of view," but apparently mine isn't? Why?

NorthernWinds, what am I to "be more careful" of, exactly? I still don't understand. إيان (talk) 15:38, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Well, I don't see how your usage of POV could be understood as literal.

Be more careful with your wording I mean. Perhaps use "opinion" rather than "POV" since "opinion" does not allude to any policy. That's all. NorthernWinds ❄️ (talk) 15:47, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

I see, well the interpretation I don't see how your usage of POV could be understood as literal appears to be your point of view. In fact, what I meant by 'POV' is exactly what you say you meant by 'POV'. If I had meant 'bias', I would have said 'bias'.

You should be more careful as well, NorthernWinds, not to immediately threaten AE, to inquire if there is uncertainty about meaning, and above all to WP:assume good faith. Happy editing. إيان (talk) 16:01, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Point taken, though I do not believe my comment amounted to a threat (at least, that was not my intention). I also still do not really understand how your usage can be understood as a literal physical point of view but at this point I trust you and think we should both move on. Original comment was struck NorthernWinds ❄️ (talk) 16:43, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Redirects you have created have been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 15 § Zero-width characters until a consensus is reached. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:19, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

More information May 27: WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce ...

May 27: WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our WikiWednesday Salon at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan, with an online-based participation option also available. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome! Featuring this salon, a presentation on on whether Wikipedia can replace law school. And also, a facilitated group discussion on the proper place of AI in the wiki-verse. All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Photography Policy. Meeting info: Wednesday, May 27 WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce (optional RSVP on-wiki). 6:00 pm – 7:00 pm (Open Hour) 7:00 pm – 9:00 pm (Wiki Salon) (Prime Produce, Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan) Also online via Zoom

Close

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:37, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

The redirect El Horria⁩ (newspaper) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 26 § El Horria⁩ (newspaper) until a consensus is reached. * Pppery * _{(alt) in solidarity} 03:47, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello!

		The Anti-Systemic Bias Barnstar
		I have been reading your edits and talk page comments on various articles on my watchlist. Today, I visited your user page, was moved by your selection of quotations, and read the essay you linked to on systemic bias. This was near the end of that page and I believe it belongs to you. Tiamut (talk) 09:35, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you and happy editing! Tiamut (talk) 09:35, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Forgive me if I offended you somehow. Tiamut (talk) 17:38, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi Tiamut! Thanks for the kind and thoughtful gesture! I greatly appreciate your contributions as well. Sorry I didn’t respond right away. إيان (talk) 20:31, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Glad it is welcome. No need to apologize. Have a good day and happy editing! Tiamut (talk) 05:49, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

More information June 24: WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce ...

June 24: WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our WikiWednesday Salon at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan, with an online-based participation option also available. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome! This month's salon is a special Pride Month edition. Help us contribute to the Wiki Loves Pride global campaign and discuss how we can better represent LGBTQ+ issues on Wikimedia platforms. All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Photography Policy. Meeting info: Wednesday, June 24 WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce (optional RSVP on-wiki). 6:00 pm – 7:00 pm (Open Hour) 7:00 pm – 9:00 pm (Wiki Salon) (Prime Produce, Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan) Also online via Zoom

Close

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:38, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi: See Draft:Darializa Avila Chevalier if you'd like to contribute. CopyleftEverything (talk) 22:36, 21 June 2026 (UTC)