User talk:Is not a

Welcome!

Hello, Is not a, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome!

I see you find your way around. In case of questions not answered by the above, please ask here, I will watch. Happy editing! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:19, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Gerda Arendt, for your warm welcome!

is a 14:14, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Name

"Is a" reminds me to double check the agreement of my subjects and verbs. The name "is a" was not available (because users are called "isa", etc.), so I chose "is not a". is a 00:20, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I put redirects at user talk:is a and user:is a. is a 11:56, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Towards an improved article on the website and for its use on BLPs

Some notes in preparation for improving articles, directly or via WP:RS and WP:BLP.

Here are opinion pieces from professional journalists charging the blog-site with anti-Semitism, some already cited in the article. (Please read the quotes from the site in these articles.) I give a few quotes for possible inclusion in the article.

"A reminder that anti-semitism has no place in debates over Israel: The consequences of a website that spouts anti-Semitism entering mainstream discourse on Israel and Palestine.". Armin Rosen. The Atlantic Monthly, Jul 14 2012 [1]

"Site founder and editor Phil Weiss" wrote: "I can justly be accused of being a conspiracy theorist because I believe in the Israel lobby theory ... certainly my theory has an explanation of the rise and influence of the neocons. They don't have a class interest but an ideological-religious one."

Jack Ross:"it was not the appeasement, but the internationalist hubris and bellicosity of Chamberlain which started World War II."

"One winner of Mondoweiss' recent "New Yorker parody contest" was a bizarre entry in which former Israeli Prime Minister has a teary reunion with the ghost of his long-lost father: Adolf Hitler."

Tobin, Jonathan S. "Anti-Semitic Hate for Kids … and Adults", Commentary, July 8, 2013.

" In the course of a blog post alleging that Jewish settlers were infringing on the rights of Arab worshippers at the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron, Mondoweiss editor and contributor Annie Robbins made the following claim in response to a comment from a reader who pointed out that the Tomb is an ancient site of Jewish worship that even predates the Holy Temples in Jerusalem:

allegedly. there’s no proof that was the location of some grand temple. maybe lots of jewish stuff retroactively lands itself right underneath islamic structures. did you ever think of that? jealous much?
"

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

"Salon.com partners With purveyor of anti-semitic material Mondoweiss", The Algemeiner, Staff author, July 23, 2012. [2]

"Against anti-Semitism, self-defense is no offense", Ben Cohen, Jewish News Service, [3]. July 21, 2014

"Mondoweiss and anti-semitism dead?", M. J. Rosenberg, Tikkun Daily, [4] March 16, 2014.

is a 07:36, 3 February 2015 (UTC) 23:39, 3 February 2015 (UTC) |}[reply]

Blocked indefinitely

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating our policy on alternate accounts. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. MastCell ^Talk 06:56, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is a violation of site policy to use an alternate account (like this one) to edit combatively on contentious topics while avoiding scrutiny on your main account (see WP:SCRUTINY and WP:GHBH). You may edit using your main account (provided it is not subject to pre-existing sanctions) but you may not continue to use this alternate account in this manner. MastCell ^Talk 06:56, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you ~~have evidence~~ want to test the veracity of your unsubstantiated accusation and have any cover when others question your misuse of administrative tools, you can file a second SPI. The first SPI was closed as a joke, if I may remind editors (at danger of violating Gamaliel's unauthorized IBAN).

I get tired of defending myself against bad-faith allegations. is a 07:11, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Appeal

MastCell (talk · contribs) needs to present evidence to support his accusations and administrative action, which he calls "bold".... (Perhaps he could consider whether another explanation is more likely or simpler, besides trying to find facts that seem to be explained by his hypothesis whilst ignoring others. Certainly he should, as I shall show.)

MastCell accused me at ANI of editing "combatively" on contentious articles.

On the contrary, a look at the histories of the articles I edited before shows even more clearly that I was following policy and that my concerns have been shared by others at WP:BLPN and at WP:AfD discussions. These articles are listed on User page. A look at my editing history shows rather that I have tried to follow the WP:BRD policy---extremely successfully with Fag Army, Donbass Association Malmö, Russian National Association, Jehovah's Witnesses in Sweden, Seventh-day Adventist Church of Tonga, and George Benson - and with headaches on Robert Kagan, Victoria Nuland, and Neoconservatism.

Jeffro77 (talk · contribs) can vouch that I did not edit war but improved George Benson with good references about the question of his being (or not) a Jehovas Witness. Even when I thought we had shown that Benson had publicly stated having donated money to Watchtower Society and for thanking "the name of Jehovah", I left the article alone rather than edit war. He can also vouch that I acknowledged not having understood the WP:BLP-Cat policy at the beginning and that I acknowledged his being correct.

In the articles on neoconservatism and Robert Kagan, I preferred not to be drawn into further conflict with Ubikwit (who has been accusing me of being Kagan from the get go and has been making accusations in nearly every edit). I had left Rjensen and Collect and the bulletin boards (RS and BLP) to do damage control; the discussions at the articles and the bulletin boards shows that my actions have been in compliance with policy.

Of course I have made errors, and obviously a big error: I tried to explain my concerns about linking to a site that has been labeled "anti-semitic" pieces in The Atlantic Monthly and Commentary (quoted in the above section).[5] Similarly I have raised concerns about Ubikwit's having since the summer tried to label Robert Kagan as Jewish and having suggested since the summer that Kagan may have double loyalty (putting Israel's security about US national interests in the conduct of foreign policy). Obviously I erred in my phrasing, and others have shown that one may raise valid concerns in a way that that does not seem to cast aspersions. I apologize to Ubikwit for my errors. I would have apologized earlier, but Gamaliel had already imposed a ban from discussing Ubikwit (albeit without authorization from policy). I trust that I may defend myself against these accusations and an indefinite block by stating these facts and by apologizing. If not, [censored].

Thus, the statement that I have been editing combatively on contentious articles is misleading, grossly distorting the truth that I have been productively editing on contentious articles - at least articles free from Ubikwit. The talk page histories and noticeboard discussions (RS, BLP) show that my editing has been compliant with policy, especially on the articles on which Ubikwit has been active. Those histories also show that Collect (talk · contribs) and Rjensen (talk · contribs) have also been attacked by Ubikwit, just as I have. Editor Collect has previously documented that Ubikwit has been sanctioned by Arbcom repeatedly and been at ANI so many times that Ubikwit was nearly banned from ANI; the diffs are in Collect's discussion at the current ANI thread. Finally, I repeat that on the articles and lately also at the discussion boards, I have left Collect and RJensen to try to protect Wikipedia and living persons from non-compliant edits - partly because I prefer not to deal with Ubikwit's walls of text, sourcing, and personal attacks (like the SPI accusations that I was Kagan).

Again, I am sorry to have to have mentioned Ubikwit in defending myself against an improper indefinite block, but MastCell's accusations needed to be rebutted. I shall hereafter avoid and ignore Ubikwit, as I have done even while contesting the improper IBAN, except as I need to defend myself against unjust accusations. (Of course, I request a two-way IBAN with Ubikwit.)

Sincerely, is a 08:25, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]