Welcome!

Hello, Davshul, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place ((helpme)) before the question. Again, welcome! --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User:Davshul/Draft of article on List of Massacres, Pogroms and Murderous Attacks on Jews Hi, I think that you'd accidently created this draft article in Wikipedia mainspace rather than your user page, so I've moved it to the above address. As a word of advice, the proposed title is pretty non-neutral, and I'd suggest that you change it to something like 'List of violent attacks on Jews'. Nick-D (talk) 07:05, 9 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nick-D, many thanks. The article, as you may have gathered is very much in its infant stage, and the name in temporary, although I've still to decide on a final name. Not sure how the article appeared on Wikipedia mainspace. It's all very new to me. Davshul (talk) 20:24, 11 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your contribution to that article! Kaisershatner (talk) 17:14, 19 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just so you know, Senegambia and Niger, later Upper Senegal and the Niger was the name of one of the constituent colonies within the AOF. It contained neither modern Senegal or Niger, but most of what is modern Mali. A good source on the constantly changing names and boundaries is The Formation of the Government General of French West Africa. C. W. Newbury. The Journal of African History , Volume 1, Issue 01, January 1960, pp 111-128, which is available on JSTOR. All the best T L Miles (talk) 20:01, 8 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I appreciate your comment. However, the paragraph in question in the article on French West Africa, refers to the eight territories that constitued the Federation, 2 of which were Senegal and Niger. As you pointed out, Senegambia and Niger, comprised most of modern Mali, the former French Soudan, which is also listed as one of the eight. Accordingly, I believe that my change is correct and should remain.Davshul (talk) 09:22, 10 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Davshul, and thank you for making numerous contributions related to the Israeli Prize and its recepients! Please try to avoid words like 'prestigious Israel Prize', called peacock terms. Thanks, and please keep up the good work! --Ynhockey ^(Talk) 22:00, 9 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The following was also placed on דוד55 Talk Page - I note that on July 9 you amended the lists of categories of many of the recipients of the Israel Prize, by substituting the the category of "Israel Prize in [a particular field] recipients" for the simple "Israel Prize recipients". Whilst it is clear that, where applicable, the recipients should be allocated the more specific category indicating the field in which the prize was awarded, I believe that the general category should also remain to enable users to view a complete list of those recipients for whom there is an article.Davshul (talk) 05:45, 10 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actually I disagree with that. When an article is placed in a child category, it should not also be in a parent category unless there's a very good (usually technical) reason. There are basically three navigation aids on Wikipedia: Categories, Lists and Navigation boxes (WP:CLN). These are not meant to be independent, but are instead meant to complete each other. Right now we have a List of Israel Prize recipients, making the category navigation obsolete. Speaking of which, the first article in the main category should be the list (which it is now). —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 10:55, 10 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am relatively new to Wikipedia and note your comment. In the meantime, it would appear that דוד55 (on whose talk page I have left a message drawing his attention to this discussion) has reinstated the parent "Israel Prize Recipient" category as a category for those articles on recipients in which a child category - "Israel Prize in [XXXX] Recipient" - also appears. However, there is also a problem as to correct child category to choose. There are now some 40 different "child" categories on the Israel Prize recipients category page. Over the years, the Committee awarding the Prize have been far from consistent in the language used by them in describing the subject for which the prize is given, and this is further complicated by the terminology used by me and others in translating the subject (for example, is “law” the same category as “science of law” or “jurisprudence” or “special contribution to society and the state in advancement of Hebrew law”?) (or is “lifetime achievement & special contribution to society”, the phrase currently used, the same category as “special contribution to society and the State”, the phrase used in earlier years?). Accordingly, as to which category to choose (or even the choice of categories to choose from) is somewhat subjective, which could, possibly, justify the reason for retaining the parent category in addition to the child category. Also, although I have been working for some weeks in expanding the names and details in the "List of Israel Prize Recipients" (there were very relatively few and it was very haphazard before I started at the end of April), it is still not yet complete as I still have 1969 to 1981 to complete, hopefully in the next week or so.Davshul (talk) 20:55, 11 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In almost all cases when an article is placed in a child category, it should not also be in a parent category. In this specific case, I think, it may be useful for many users that the article will be in the parent and child directory. For example if somebody search the specific recipient but not know the exact spelling of his name and the subject the man was awarded the prize. david1955 (talk) 17:31, 12 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for adding the link for Josef Tal. I'll add the Hebrew version dEtan Tal (talk) 17:47, 12 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In the article List of Israel Prize recipients, the names and details of all the recipients (both the chronological list and the alphabetical list) have now been completed. What steps should now be taken in order to reassess the article's rating on the Wikipedia Israel Project quality scale, and also to ensure that that the article is correctly referenced within the project? Davshul (talk) 20:35, 19 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Davshul! Firstly, the barnstar is well deserved. You took an important topic that was lacking and improved it. I sincerely hope you do the same for other Israel-related articles and lists. To your query, I will respond in two points:

1. In the past, we used to assess all list articles as 'list', but then general consensus on Wikipedia came to a conclusion that lists, like articles, need to be assessed on the regular scale (stub, start, C, B, GA, A, FA). This creates a problem because we don't have strict criteria for lists. The closest to that is the criteria at FLC. Personally I believe that lists should only be assessed as stub, start, B and FL because we don't need such an elaborate system for them. In that respect, the lists as it currently stands would be start-class, because it is complete but lacking a proper lead and table formatting for B-class. This is my personal view that might not reflect consensus, but I am not aware of anyone else rating Israel-related lists on the quality scale. Feel free to initiate a discussion about it at WT:ISRAEL, and if you don't want to, I may do so during the weekend.
2. In terms of referencing and navigation, I recommend creating a navigation template for each year or decade that the prize was awarded. A link to the list and the main article would appear in the heading of the template, while the names of the people would appear in the template itself. The only reason not to take this course of action at this point would be because most prize recepients don't have articles. However, on the other hand this might make more editors aware that so many prominent Israelis are missing articles and perhaps someone will take up the task of creating some.

I hope I answered your questions. Cheers, Ynhockey ^(Talk) 23:27, 19 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Davshul, I understand why linking to another Wiki article is problematic...but....I couldn't find a list in English anywhere else. I have now written to the Israeli Ministry of Education and its various departments to find out if such a list does exist. Any ideas? I could link the reference to a Hebrew page, if that is ok for an English article (seems silly to me).Soosim (talk) 06:09, 1 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Soosim. I do not believe that a full list in English appears anywhere else, apart from the List of Israel Prize recipients on Wikipedia. This is why I have dedicated so much time to completing and maintaining such list, and am gradually creating articles on each of the recipients. On the specific citation issue, the Wiki guidelines specifically prohibit source citations to other Wikipedia articles, whether in English or another language. Obviously the other article can either be Wikilinked or, as in this case, it can be specifically listed under "See also" (which I have added to all articles of Israel Prize recipients). Cheers Davshul (talk) 07:07, 1 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Davshul! I have compiled this list to better assist you in the creation of at least some Israel Prize recepient articles. So far just the 50s. Cheers, Ynhockey ^(Talk) 23:11, 3 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Ynhockey. Thanks. For the moment, as the regards the Israel Prize, I have been concentrating on tidying up existing articles on recipients and the various categories of recipients - there's a lot of work to be done! Also, following your suggestion of a few weeks ago, in light of the completion of the List, I have been gradually removing the parent "Israel Prize recipient" category, provided there is reference to the List and the relevent subcategory or subcategories, which I have been extending somewhat. Davshul (talk) 13:51, 4 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Davshul! Please note that Hebrew text on Wikipedia should not be in bold. Instead, you may wish to use the ((Hebrew)) template for Hebrew, although it's generally redundant for text that doesn't have nikud. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 07:34, 7 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I noticed you have been making changes in the reference section. "References" is the standard around here (hence "reflist"). Any books/articles not cited in the body of the text belong in a section called "Bibliography." --Gilabrand (talk) 09:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Gilabrand. I have been working for some time on the List of Israel Prize recipients and, following completion of the list, I have been concentrating on the several hundred existing articles of the individual recipients in order to bring measure of consistency to how the award of the Prize (and other prizes) are treated (although I have not attempted to make such treatment identical in all cases). As regards the the issues of "References/Notes" - at one stage for a short period, I started adopting "Notes" rather than "References" as a preferred term. However, following your comment regarding David Rubinger a few days ago, and as I did not feel particularly strongly on the subject, I ceased making such change (although pursuant to WP:footers, both would appear to be acceptable, although "References" is more popular). However, there are a number of instances where there are cited "reflist" references (including a reference, generally added by me, giving a source in connection with the award of the Israel Prize) as well as lists of "References" not specifically cited in the text (none of which were posted by me). In these circumstances, I have adopted the method used extensively on Wikipedia on terming the cited references as "Notes" and the non-cited as "References". As regards your comment regarding the use of the term "Bibliography", in WP:footers this term is specifically discouraged as it "may be confused with a list of printed works by the subject of a biography." Regards. Davshul (talk) 10:13, 13 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, I have also been working for several years to create some kind of consistency, and have following the guidelines cited above. A bibliography is a list of books used for reference. A list of books by the subject of the biography is called: Published works. Differentiating "references" and "notes" in this way only causes more confusion, and undoes whatever consistency I have introduced over the years in WP articles.--Gilabrand (talk) 10:30, 13 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gilabrand. This is clearly an issue about which you feel quite strongly. Accordingly, where there are references that are not cited in the text I am, as suggested by you, now generally placing these under a "Bibliography" caption (and will gradually apply this to all articles on Israel Prize recipients recently amended by me). The term appears to be widely used despite its discouragement in WP:footers. (I agree with you as to the definition of "bibliography' but there does appear to be some basis for Wikipedia's contention that it might be confusing, as in the short time since reading your latest comment I have come across examples in Ovadia Yosef and Emanuel Goldberg. Also, in many instances "Further reading" (widely used) or "Sources" (e.g.Saul Lieberman) appear to be preferred terms.) Davshul (talk) 12:18, 13 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The incorrect use of the term "Bibliography" (namely, the use of such term in connection with the subjects's published works instead of a list of works used for reference) appears more widespread than I expected. In addition to those mentioned above, and without specifically searching, I have come across quite a number of instances, even in well-researched articles (for example, Abba Eban, Emile Habibi, Yehoshafat Harkabi, Gavriel Salomon), which I have corrected. Wikipedia's view, expressed in WP:footers, that the term "Bibliography", even when correctly used, should be avoided as it is likely to cause confusion, appears valid. Accordngly, where possible, I intend using an alternative term, such as "Further reading" or , if relevent, "External links", and will also employ these terms to described those references that are not cited in the text (which I had initially started placing under the caption "Bibliography"). Davshul (talk) 07:07, 16 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey Davshul. I've changed the Shaul Avigur article so that it now has a notes section for ((reflist)) and a separate references section below it for the book Every Spy a Prince. If you look at the article history, I wrote this several years ago before inline refs were very popular on WP, and thus I simply wrote the book as the sole source. Eventually I should go back and add inline citations with page numbers, but for the time being this will do. See the picture on the right of Wikipedia:Footers#Notes_and_References. Further reading is only for books/articles that would help the reader get a better understanding of the topic, but were not used as sources for the article itself. I hope that made some sense. Thanks! (BTW, I just did the same thing to Meir Amit. The two books listed were used as sources, so there has to be some indication that this is were the the info came from) Joshdboz (talk) 16:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Joshdboz. Thanks for your quick response. However, as regards the action taken by you, please see the earlier discussion under the caption "References", above. Regards Davshul (talk) 19:04, 16 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is unfortunately a bit confusing. I believe your original statement is correct: However, there are a number of instances where there are cited "reflist" references (including a reference, generally added by me, giving a source in connection with the award of the Israel Prize) as well as lists of "References" not specifically cited in the text (none of which were posted by me). In these circumstances, I have adopted the method used extensively on Wikipedia on terming the cited references as "Notes" and the non-cited as "References". Whatever the chosen method of displaying inline citations and general references at the bottom of a page, a book/article labeled as a "reference" or "source" or "bibliography" (in the sense of a source) should never be relabeled as "further reading", as this would imply that the information in the article did not come from it, which is not the case. Joshdboz (talk) 19:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. I noticed that early this morning you went around to various biography articles about Nobel Prize laureates, adding to each a "See also" with a link to List of Nobel laureates. This is inappropriate given Wikipedia layout policies. It's also wholly redundant in several cases where you've added the link under a "See also" section when the link was already present in one of various ((Nobel Peace Prize Laureates 19XX-19XX)) templates. Please be more careful in the future when adding internal links to pages and that you follow the policies of WP:ALSO and WP:MOS regarding "See also" sections. DKqwerty (talk) 15:49, 11 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi DKqwerty. with reference to your comment. On articles of all Nobel Laureates, other than those of the Nobel Peace Prize laureates, there is indeed a link to the complete list of Nobel Laureates, the link being from the words "Nobel Laureates" in "Nobel Laureates in Literature", "Nobel Laureates in Physics", etc. at the haeding to the template near the foot of the page. However, the template relating to the Peace Prize Laureates does not contain the words "Nobel Laureates" in the heading, and accordingly there is no link to the complete list of Nobel Laureates (only to a list of Nobel Peace Prize Laureates). It is for this reason that I added a "See also" section, with a reference to the complete list. This was only added with regard to the Peace Prize laureates. Accordingly, reference to the list does not appear to be redundant, nor could I see where it was in contravention of the Wiki policies mention by you. Davshul (talk) 16:17, 11 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Policy-wise, this from WP:ALSO:

Links already integrated into the body of the text are generally not repeated in a "See also" section, and navigation boxes at bottom of articles may substitute for many links.

If you click the word "laureates" in the caption of the template, it links to (the "complete") List of Nobel laureates, exactly the article you're trying to add to a "See also" section. So, according to policy, that's redundant. DKqwerty (talk) 16:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There appears to be a lack of consistency between the various articles on Nobel Peace Prize Laureates. In some (which frankly I had not noticed) the word "Laureates" links to the complete list. However, in others (e.g.. Barack Obama) it does not. 16:42, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Than please suggest fixing the template on their talk pages, or just be bold and do it. But please don't tediously add "See also" sections into multiple articles when you have a perfectly legitimate way to do it all at once with the templates. DKqwerty (talk) 16:50, 11 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Black Nobel Prize laureates. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Nobel Prize laureates. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:22, 29 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I saw you made some constructive edits to the article mentioned above. Unfortunately, this is quite remarkable on this specific list ;-)

Perhaps you would like to have a look at the respective talk page. There are some open issues that need to be discussed in order to make the compilation o this list stable. It would be nice, if together we could elaborate further the rules underlying this list. Tomeasy _{T C} 09:26, 29 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for putting the article on your watch list and keeping an active eye. For more than a year, I had to do this alone, so I really appreciate your support. Tomeasy _{T C} 15:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I looked at this one again, and I still think the tag should stay for now. The purpose of such tags is to warn readers (especially high school and college stduents) that the article is incomplete in some way. There is only a single source in English in this stub, and very few English Wikipedians can read Hebrew. Please see WP:BLP and WP:RS. If you wish, I can help you find more sources and add them. Bearian (talk) 19:38, 7 November 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I saw from here that it's been exactly one year since you joined the project. Happy WikiBirthday! Keep up the good work, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 21:01, 9 November 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Davshul. If you want to move a page, please use the move tag at the top. Do not copy text from an article and paste it into a new one, as you did with Ya'akov Cohen/Ya'akov Cohen (rabbi) as it breaks the WP:GDFL licensing and requires an admin to move/delete/restore to undo. Cheers, пﮟოьεԻ 57 15:21, 3 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Davshul!

Unfortunately I haven't had much time to work on this. I have moved the year field to the left as you suggested, and added a comments field. I am sure that most other tweaks can easily be done manually. Cheers, Ynhockey ^(Talk) 00:00, 14 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I notice that you have been adding people to the British Jews category. People should go into English, Scottish, Welsh etc Jews, which in turn comes under "British Jews". The British Jews cat was far too big, hence they're subdivided by UK country.--MacRusgail (talk) 17:44, 17 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey! I saw you had done some work on the list of nobel laureates. I am currently working on the Nobel Prize article. Since it is a top importance article and not even GA class I am trying to make it a GA article and perhaps further after that. However, I'm in a state now where I could use some help. I need a new pair (several pairs in fact) of eyes to look at the article and the talk page for improving prose, debation of different things and some sourcing. Do you got any possibility to help out?

Cheers --Esuzu 16:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, yeah suddenly I got lots of responses and others that I hadn't asked started editing etc. as well :) So now it is hopefully soon ready to become a GA. Thanks for your answer though and good luck with your projects! --Esuzu 20:57, 20 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Davshul! The thing you are looking for already exists. In the template ((cite web)), there are parameters for archive pages:

• archiveurl
• archivedate

Cheers, Ynhockey ^(Talk) 22:42, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi again! Thank you for letting me know. I will update the list when I have time. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 10:11, 1 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The New York Times and Forward state that this poet died Wednesday, Jan 20 (7 AM).[1][2] You revert this information to Jan 19. What are your sources?--24.46.28.223 (talk) 19:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See discussion page of Avrom Sutzkever. Davshul (talk) 12:17, 27 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Adding all the BP recipients. As you could tell, I ran out of steam ...--Epeefleche (talk) 19:49, 11 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It happens to all of us. Davshul (talk) 20:33, 11 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Davshul

I have just removed the listings from WP:CFD/S of your proposed speedy renaming of Category:Gibraltarian emigrants to the United Kingdom and related categories, since these renamings were contested.

Please feel free to nominate these categories for a full discussion at WP:CFD, if you want to. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:58, 12 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I hope that you will take a look at the wikibias website.~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by RockvilleMD (talk • contribs) 15:31, 5 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, thanks for the encouragement. I thought new articles were listed there automatically (else, how do you find them so quickly?!) I will do the listing henceforth.--Sreifa (talk) 18:22, 3 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi,

Please note my remark in talk:Gdalia Alon. Thanks, אבינעם (talk) 21:55, 20 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 03:21, 17 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Nobel laureates that are organizations, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.

Regarding your comment at WP:CFDS relating to the Israelis of descent category—do you intend on starting a full CFD to propose the change you suggest? The change you're suggesting is unrelated to my suggested change from "Israelis" to "Israeli people", so unless you intend on starting a CFD right away we can probably make the change I proposed and leave your proposal to a time when you or someone wants to formally propose it via CFD. I'm just not sure what you planned intentions are. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:18, 15 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You definitely would need to raise the issue via a full CFD if you are worried about changing "descent" to "origin". That is not an issue for the speedy renaming section—it falls outside of C2C. Feel free to nominate the categories any time, though. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 10:18, 18 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The "people" has been added per C2C, so now you can go ahead and nominate them for your change. For simplicity's sake, I think this is the best route rather than trying to piggyback the two changes together. Go ahead and nominate the newly created ones for the change. As I said above, I believe the change requires a full CFD (but of course you can choose to nominate them using the route of your choice). Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 10:43, 18 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wait a minute, what do you mean by "people" because in Israel it's much more complicated since in the political state of Israel, Jewish and non-Jewish citizens are the same, however, at the same time, Israel is also THE Jewish state and Israeli Jewish citizens need to be identified as such due to the ethnic and religious definitions of Jewish identity that by several millennia precedes and supersedes and goes beyond what Israeli politics or laws since 1948 may or may not say since in the broader sense it is Jewish Law and Jewish history that play the key role in teaching who and what are Jews and who and what are Israeli Jews in contradistinction to Israeli people in a meaningless generic sense. Once again, this highly complicated and even controversial matter should be brought to broader discussion at places like WP:TALKJUDAISM before arbitrary changes based on minor WP policies are made by one or two editors who may lack a deeper insight and knowledge of this subject. Thanks for your understanding. Sincerely, IZAK (talk) 11:41, 23 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

More clarity about Israeli Jews needed in your CFD

Hi Davshul: Regarding your CFD of Israelis, what do you think of my my suggestion to rethink and rename your CFD [3] as follows: "RELATED OBSERVATION: There was some debate recently when similar proposals were thrown about at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 June 16#Category:American Jews by national origin where the suggestion to rename to "XYZ Jews of ABC origin" went nowhere, and leaving the older and more basic category names such as Category:Mexican American Jews and Category:Iraqi American Jews etc etc etc and the rest intact. The best solution would be to propose to rename this CFD to read Propose renaming the following (category pages listed under Category:Israeli people by ethnic or national origin): Category:Israeli people of American descent to Category:Israeli American Jews; Category:Israeli people of Argentine descent to Category:Israeli Argentinian Jews etc etc etc for all. This way it's clear what the subject is, Israeli Jews and not Israeli non-Jews such as Arab citizens of Israel aka as Israeli Arabs for which there could be categories like Category:Israeli Egyptian Arabs meaning those who are descendants of Arabs who came from Egypt etc etc etc for all non-Jewish groups in Israel. This would create real accuracy and not what is suggested here which is just the same furniture being moved from one side of the room to the other, because the words "Israeli people" means all Israelis and that includes both Jews and non-Jews who are Israeli citizens. Of course to Jews, the word "Israeli/s" generally or colloquially means "Jewish Israeli/s" but the fact of the matter is that as far as Israeli law and the State of Israel is concerned its Jewish and non-Jewish citizens are all "Israelis" therefore this CFD rename is pointless and equals "six of one and half a dozen of the other" and makes no difference at all." Thank you. IZAK (talk) 11:31, 23 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi IZAK. Thanks for bringing your comments to my attention. I have responded to your comments on the Cfd page. As you will not, I do not agree with you on this. Apart from the other points made on the Cfd discussion page, although terms such as "Mexican American Jews" or "Iraqi American Jews" might be customary in the US, the terms, "Mexican Israeli Jews" or "Iraqi Israeli Jews", (or "Israeli Mexican Jews" or "Israeli Iraqi Jews") do not, I believe, work, nor have I ever heard them used generally. Cheers Davshul (talk) 09:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I really appriciate all your help in improving these important articles. I myself plan on adding much more essential information to these articles in the the near future and maybe even creating the years articles for the British Mandate for Palestine as well. Keep up the good work! TheCuriousGnome (talk) 14:38, 8 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Israeli people wounded in war, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Robofish (talk) 18:08, 13 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Davshul! I would like to hear your opinion on this issue. Cheers, Ynhockey ^(Talk) 20:03, 14 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, these are Britain-related, and therefore come under the rule about date-formatting for anglophone countries. British date format is the international one. You have reverted a number of dashes into hyphens, which is not only internally inconsistent, but wrong according to WP:MOSDASH. Tony (talk) 10:16, 16 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are now some 100 articles in this series using the Month followed by Day format. Wikipedia states that the date format chosen by the first major contributor in the early stages of an article should generally continue to be used. As regards the dashes/hyphen change, I have no problem with changes made by you, my reverting the same was the consequence of your including the date format change in the same edit. I would also add that the summary given by you totally misrepresented the extent of the edits made by you, merely referring to "fixed dashes using a script", whereas your edits went far beyond this. Davshul (talk) 10:43, 16 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• The Manual of Style does indeed have provision for retaining the date format of the first major contributor. However, this rule is trumped in the case of articles about British subjects, in which case close national ties applies. WP:MOSNUM (see the lede) determines that the dd mmm yyyy date format is used on British subjects. I will slowly work through the series and change all the date formats. You can also help, if you wish. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 16:32, 16 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have no objection to the change in date format, provided such change extends throughout the series and is not limited to isolated pages. Also, the "British ties" may be applicable for the British Mandate period, but not necessary for Israel or for the earlier Ottoman period. Davshul (talk) 16:54, 16 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. I will assist Ohconfucius; please let him or me know whether you have any further issues with our work. Tony (talk) 04:12, 17 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Davshul. You recently created the page Avraham Fahn and categorised it as a Living person. Please check and be 100% sure that this is factual, and alter if necessary. If you would like to know more about why we require this level of accuracy on BLPs, please don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. Happy editing!

Hebrew Wikipedia still shows him as a living person and an Internet search (Hebrew and English) do not reveal any notice of his death. Davshul (talk) 22:18, 18 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hope you like the new article. It still have some events (which I question their notability) which have been previously added by other editors and need verification. Please help me improve the quality of the article. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 16:04, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I consider this article to be extremely good, considering it has only recently been created, and far preferable to the "Year in Ottoman Syria" series (although a similar timeline for the British administered/Mandate of Palestine would not, I believe, work). I will add events, as I come across them, and try to improve the article if I can, as I am tendeavoring to do for your other two "babies" - Year in Palestine Mandate/Israel series. Davshul (talk) 16:31, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

...here. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 01:28, 2 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Richard Feynman and to Albert Einstein, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. Categories must also be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Thank you. - DVdm (talk) 11:45, 9 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The edits made by me in the two instances in question were the addition of a list (not a category) which included the names of both subjects of the two articles. I fail to see how this was incorrect, and suggect that any discussion on the inclusion/exclusion of this list takes place on Talk:List of Jewish Nobel laureates#Link from articles on laureates. Davshul (talk) 21:45, 9 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are correct about the categories. My apologies. However, per wp:BRD, any discussion about articles should take place on the article's talk pages. DVdm (talk) 09:37, 10 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your proposed deletion makes perfect sense, of course. Let's see if logic will prevail. Marokwitz (talk) 09:50, 8 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You totaly missed the point of my comments, per organi(z/s)ations. ^{şṗøʀĸşṗøʀĸ: τᴀʟĸ} 06:44, 23 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

היי, ההצעה שלך לגבי זוכי פרסי נובל היהודים, נראית לי מצוינת. גם אני חשבתי על הרעיון, אבל אני מתקשה באנגלית, ולא ידעתי איך לנסח את זה בלי שאשמע עילג.

אם אתה צריך עזרה בעניין, אני אשמח לעזור. טכנית אני חלש, אבל ידע רב בנושא יש לי. יניבפור (talk) 11:11, 26 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there, saw your entries on WP:CFDS. I've been there myself a couple of times. You don't need to add them to the list there, though, you can just blank the category page and add the ((db-author)) template to it, and an admin will be along with the broom in no time. :) - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 07:06, 28 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No worries! Glad to help. - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 07:10, 28 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

She's not jamacian she is from Jamaica,Queens,New York -24.251.12.19(talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.251.12.91 (talk) 18:50, 12 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1. First of all, I think Larry_King should go under the category: [Category:American_people_of_Belarusian-Jewish_descent] because it says in the article that his parents emigrated from Belarus and they were Jewish. Also I think Peter_Douglas and Eric_Douglas should go under that category as since their father Kirk_Douglas is listed under that category as well. 2. I think it should be noted in the Alexandra_Powers article that her mother is Katharyn_Powers and was a writer for variety of TV series. This article says they are related: http://www.museumstuff.com/learn/topics/Katharyn_Powers Also I think in the Katharyn_Powers article these links should be added: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0584251/ http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Katharyn_Powers http://www.moviefone.com/celebrity/katharyn-powers/2035049/main http://stargate.wikia.com/wiki/Katharyn_Powers In the Alexandra Powers article I created I found a website that says she is in Scientology. Here's the website: http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats/by-name/a/alexandra-powers.html Should this be used as a reference in the article? Please let me know.Neptunekh2 (talk) 06:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would you mind cleaning up the Alexandra Powers article. I added a reference and messed up. Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 15:38, 27 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would it be possible to chat with you through an IM software sometime soon? TheCuriousGnome (talk) 23:44, 27 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is your username Davshul? When would you be online? TheCuriousGnome (talk) 12:32, 29 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am having problems with Skype. Please connect to the wikipedia-en channel (you can use the simple freenode Java application at http://webchat.freenode.net/) - you'll find me there. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 13:52, 30 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Moshe Zilberg, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.ameu.org/page.asp?iid=233&aid=279&pg=2.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 23:56, 27 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regarding your addition of categories to Liesel Pritzker, a category must be supported by a reliably sourced statement in the article. She may be Ukranian-Jewish, but I did not see anything in the article to support that. If I missed something, please let me know. Thanks. Cresix (talk) 20:11, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regarding your query on Liesel Pritzker, her genealogy is listed in the linked article on the Pritzker family, which described as a Jewish family of Ukranian-Jewish origin. Davshul (talk) 20:24, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would prefer a link in her article, and suggest that you add a brief statement to her article. But I won't quibble since her article is linked to an article that provides the information. Thanks for your response. Cresix (talk) 20:27, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hei there. If you have some spare time, please help me improve the existing text I have translated from the Hebrew Wikipedia (regard the Inuse template at the top of the page). TheCuriousGnome (talk) 23:34, 16 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, I noticed your recent category work. Please be aware of WP:SUBCAT and make sure not to make redundant categories. For example, those included in Category: Jewish American scientists should probably not be included in Category:American Jews as well. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 22:57, 31 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Davshul for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 13:06, 23 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just returned from a trip - absolute nonsence. Davshul (talk) 22:10, 20 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not revert my changes. You have clearly missed a lot of the discussions going on for the last months regarding the categorization of scientists in medieval Islam (here "medieval Islam" has both geographical and temporal definitions, and not a religious definition to compare it to "medieval Christianity". The term includes Arabs and non-Arabs, Muslims and non-Muslims). So there is no need for the agenda accusations. Please see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 April 2#Islamic Golden Age and also some support for the idea of removing "modern-day" Iraq, Syria, Egypt...etc Thanks. Al-Andalusi (talk) 13:49, 18 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I kindly ask you to revert your changes to the categories and articles that I've updated. Al-Andalusi (talk) 13:55, 18 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As you are aware, I caonsider your edits incorrect and against Wiki guidelines and have responded in connection with CfD 18 April 2011 - Medieval Arab physicians. Davshul (talk) 10:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello there. I would gladly appreciate any help you can provide in improving this article which I have recently created. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 20:28, 21 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I shall have a look and see where I can assist. Davshul (talk) 10:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks! TheCuriousGnome (talk) 14:16, 22 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, done. Rich Farmbrough, 12:41, 15 May 2011 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Davshul, I actually did put up Cfd banners. Al-Andulusi then came along and deleted them. He is the one in violation of wikipedia policy, not me. I guess I should have put in the edit summary that was what I was doing, but I really did not expect such subterfuge and attempts to sabotage.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:42, 24 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there, Thanks for assuming I was fixing that by-product of improvement, it got fixed just before I received your message. :-) Yes, I am very aware of the history of the flag, and also know how to do it, technically that is, but... I suppose I'm feeling a bit "culturally sensitive" or some such thing, at least until I've completed the insertion of the template throughout the series. Also, there remains the problem of what to do before 1910... One option might be to leave the top two flags as they are, and add two historically correct flags below. I don't know yet, and there's still some time 'til I reach the end. Care to add any more thoughts on the subject? I'm grateful for some outside input. Thanks, it is a bit boring, and yet rewarding to actually read the articles as I go through them. --StephanNaro (talk) 17:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi again,

I would really like to see 13th century in South Africa merged into ADs in Southern Africa, though I suppose a redirect could be left behind. The 13th is just, well... empty, and also leaves a redlink in the Timeline, not to mention my terribly/all-important bright, shiny new navbox... Do I seriously have to go through the whole process of requesting a merge? If so, I'm just not up to it, and will leave it alone. If I knew enough about SA history, I might rather create a 14th century article, and possibly expand the 13th, but... I don't. --StephanNaro (talk) 17:18, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Howabout, at this stage, creating a redirect for both 13th century in South Africa and 14th century in South Africa to ADs in Southern Africa. This will, I believe, remove the redlinks from Timeline of South African history, but leave the possiblilty of re-establishing the pages as separate articles should sufficient information become avaialable in the future. At the moment the only item in 13th century in South Africa is already mentioned in the ADs in Southern Africa article. Two other point as far as the AD page is concerned: The page is entitled AD but the [[Timeline of South African history|Timeline] page refers to CE. I believe there should be consistency. Also, I suggest that at the top of the AD/CE page it includes the words "to the end of 14th century", even though not part of title. Davshul (talk) 13:28, 17 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Now that I think on it some, what is your evidence for asserting this congregation to be an "important part" of Manchester's Jewish community? Your user page states that you're a native of London, not a Mancusian, and that you've lived in Israel for over three decades. It couldn't possibly be personal knowledge, therefore, so if there's some reliable source from where you're getting your information that hasn't made it into the article, shouldn't it go in?  ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  11:36, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Ravenswing. First, I suggest you look closer at my user page regarding the only specific activity mentioned there; secondly, I have a great deal of friends and associates from Manchester, including some who were members of this synagogue; thirdly, I have family in Manchester; and fourthly, the word is "Mancunian". Davshul (talk) 11:58, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So ... your "source" is word of mouth? Of course that's not a valid source upon which to keep an article, and I hope and trust you'll promptly amend your vote on that AfD.  ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  15:05, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Alfred Mansfeld, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0013_0_13199.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 11:14, 23 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article created by me is much wider than the jewish virtual library article and was prepared without even knowledge of the existence of the such article. At the time of its creation, it was based solely on Hebrew sources. It may well be expanded by me to include information from additional sources (both Hebrew and English), but this will be done without any reference to the jewish virtual library article. Obviously, when dealing with facts about a person's life, some of the facts must appear in both places, but, as mentioned above, no part of the article was copied from the jewish virtual library article. Davshul (talk) 11:33, 23 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I recently re-created the category Category:Irish people of Jewish descent. You'll notice the link is red, because it was delted as per you discussion here. However, as you may notice there are many categories with the formula 'X people of Jewish descent'. And while you may disagree with labeling living people, or misuse of categories, being of Jewish descent can only be true or false. I agree 'sloppy application' of the 'X Jews' categories are given, but that is because of people who identify themselves as being (or not being) Jewish. With Jewish descent however, you cannot dispute the fact that one of your anncestors may have been Jewish, in the same way if your anncestor was African. Whatever a person says about themselves, giving that person a 'x of jewish descent' cat is true - because its true. You get what I mean.

More to the point - my re-creation of the Irish people of Jewish descent (if you click the red link above), is actually different from the version that was deleted July 9th. My version has a properly structured cat links (following standard cats of 'X people of Jewish descent'), it links to the 'Irish people by ethnic or national origin' and 'people of jewish descent by nationality', both of which are container categories. You will also notice that the category is no longer empty, and in fact has Bob Geldof in it.

I believe that all the points I have made above, counteract all of the arguements used by yourself and others to delete the (not so well maintained version) originally. Please will you allow the category to reopen in the way which was created by me? Colt .55 (talk) 21:02, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ps. You were only able to delete the category because it was empty. All of you arguements could apply to any of the 'X people of Jewish descent' but you wouldn't have got away with it, because they are too well maintained.

Hi Davshul! Is it possible to update South Sudan on this map ? —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 10:16, 9 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have now updated and revised the above map, which is now here. Apart from adding South Sudan, I have made quite a few other changes. Davshul (talk) 12:00, 10 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please be advised of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards and prizes.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:58, 14 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I thought you might be interested in going over the following articles I've created recently:

• List of Israeli Ashkenazi Jews
• List of Israeli Mizrahi Jews and Sephardi Jews
• List of Israeli Ethiopian Jews

You're more than welcome to try and improve the articles​​. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 19:16, 30 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Davshul,

I corrected a few weeks ago the date of recognition of Israel by South Africa anonimously (sorry for that), but gave no source, so you changed it back to the previous version. The exact date was 14 May 1949, not 24 May 1948. I cited the source, I hope that's okay now.

Best regards, Fcsaba88 (talk) 14:03, 22 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Fcsaba88.

I regret to point out that the date stated by you (in May 1949) is not the date when South Africa first recognised the State of Israel. De Facto recognition of Israel by South Africa took place in May 1948, a few days after Israel's declaration of independence, such recognition having been accorded by General Smut's United Party (which was voted out of power in the general election of May 26, 1948). This is confirmed by a number of sources, including the following by:

• American Jewish Year Book 1948-1949 page 302, which (according to p. 297) was written in July 1948.
• American Jewish Year Book, 1950 page 394.
• Encyclopedia Judaica 1971 volume 15, page 206.
• Chaim Weitzman's Trial and Error, page 585.

The date given by you (according to the article on Jan Smuts) appears to be the date of de jure recognition granted by South Africa's apartheid National Party a year later. I am therefore amending the article accordingly. Davshul (talk) 19:47, 25 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

jerusalem is jewish capital forever. in anny time. פארוק (talk) 16:30, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Davshul! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents Discussion--70.162.171.210 (talk) 17:04, 22 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Disruptive? Not according to my definition. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 03:19, 30 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ohconfucius, thank you for your support. Have you seen the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Recent years#Date linkage in subpages. Davshul (talk) 08:08, 1 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you can I would be happy if you would help me improve this article which I created that covers one of the latest most controversial issues in the Israeli society. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 02:02, 28 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:West Indian Nobel laureates, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 16:35, 14 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Physicians of the Ottoman Empire, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:23, 30 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Davshul. You participated in a CfD on Category:Israeli people by ethnic or national origin two years ago. This CfD is currently being revisited so I'm hoping you can participate in the debate. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 14:09, 7 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just to let you know (I am supposed to - this is what it says). Ottawahitech (talk) 00:02, 22 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration 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 impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Tchernichovsky Prize recipients, which you created, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:55, 21 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 01:38, 20 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Medieval Ottoman astronomers, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:45, 7 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:17th-century Jewish physicians of the Ottoman Empire, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:02, 7 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Category:Medieval Samaritan physicians, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 07:54, 1 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:17th-century Czech physicians, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:23, 4 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Nepalese Jews requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting 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 with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:31, 28 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Medieval Iraqi astrologers, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:37, 30 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:English Jews of the Medieval and Tudor period has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:28, 2 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:18th-century Jewish medical doctors of England requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting 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 with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:47, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Awards by universities and colleges in Sri Lanka requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting 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 with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:39, 9 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Awards by municipalities by country has been nominated for deletion and dual upmerging the subcategories. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:04, 10 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Lamdan Prize recipients has been nominated for listification. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:11, 17 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:18th-century Jewish physicians of Italy has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 09:15, 26 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:17th-century Jewish physicians of Italy has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 09:16, 26 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Medieval Jewish physicians of Italy has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 09:17, 26 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Aviation in Sint Eustatius has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 12:07, 3 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Transport in Sint Eustatius has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 12:09, 3 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Transport in Saba has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 12:51, 3 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Aviation in Saba has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 12:51, 3 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Electric power companies in Saba has been nominated for merging to Category:Electric power companies of the Netherlands. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 17:22, 3 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Energy in Saba has been nominated for merging to Category:Economy of Saba. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 17:22, 3 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Companies of Saba has been nominated for merging to Category:Economy of Saba. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 17:22, 3 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Sapir Prize recipients has been nominated for listification. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:13, 8 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Medieval Flemish astronomers has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:53, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:17th-century Flemish physicians has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 15:55, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:16th-century Flemish physicians has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 10:49, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Medieval Moroccan geographers indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting 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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:28, 9 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Medieval Dutch physicians has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 16:07, 3 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Medieval Persian geographers has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 12:20, 21 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Medieval Kurdish astronomers indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting 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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:11, 1 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Iraqi geographers indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting 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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:44, 13 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:17th-century Flemish physicians has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:33, 14 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Medieval Yemeni astronomers has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:15, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Russian and Soviet emigrants has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you.  —Michael Z. 18:09, 28 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Russian and Soviet emigrants to Canada has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you.  —Michael Z. 03:15, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Awards by university and college by country has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 15:48, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]