User talk:Dale Stern
Dale Stern, you are invited to the Teahouse!
[edit]
|
Hi Dale Stern! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join other new editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from other new editors. These editors have also just begun editing Wikipedia; they may have had similar experiences as you. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from your peers. I hope to see you there! Rosiestep (I'm a Teahouse host) This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:13, 4 November 2014 (UTC) |
Welcome
[edit]
|
Talkback
[edit]
Message added 03:03, 30 November 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Dismas|(talk) 03:03, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
Rabin
[edit]Hi! I see you're adding a lot to Yitzhak Rabin's page, as am I. I'm working mostly from a couple of biographies of him. Anyway, I encourage you to keep adding material, but please try to be as specific as possible when citing your sources. For the first time you mention a book, it's encouraged to name the author, book title, publisher, year, and page number. After that, you can abbreviate it to author and page number if that's easier. See for example at Wikipedia:Citing sources#Books.
Anyway, our paths may cross again. When multiple people work on a page, sometimes differences of opinion arise as to what belongs in the article. That's OK; we'll discuss as necessary. Happy editing! --Jprg1966 (talk) 05:16, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
- For example, I can see that you have done a great deal of editing involving the opinions of Uri Milstein. That's fine, but I worry that his opinions are too prevalent on Rabin's page right now. The Altalena incident certainly deserves to be mentioned in Rabin's profile, but a lengthy passage quoting Milstein's opinion might be overkill. In the Altalena Affair article is where a lengthier discussion could take place—although again, only in proportion to Milstein's weight in the scholarly debate on the topic.
- One last, important thing: your personal correspondence with Milstein is not a reliable source to be cited in Wikipedia. I am also worried that it raises concerns about your impartiality as an editor given that you have edited almost entirely on his page or citing his work. Is there a relationship between the two of you the community might be interested in knowing about? --Jprg1966 (talk) 06:19, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Milstein
[edit]Hello,
you have expanded the article about Uri Milstein. Thank you very much for your collaboration. Anyway, most of what you added comes from Milstein books and the page number is not specified. There are two problems with this:
- This fails with WP:RS (Reliable Source): somebody who talks about himself is certainly not neutral and thereforce what he says should be checked and confirmed.
- This fails with WP:V (Verifiability): this is much more important. You cannot claim that an information comes from a book. You have to specify precisely which edition and which page. In some cases, it could even be asked that the precise quote is given.
Would you mind addind the page numbers linked to the information that you added in the article about Milstein. Then I may ask you some more details given some information sounds not neutral.
By the way, are you a way or the other linked to Uri Milstein (are you him, one of his student, a relative...) ?
Thank you, Pluto2012 (talk) 07:27, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
- Hello,
- Thank you for your answer on my talk page and thank you for adding more precise references in the article.
- In answer to some of your questions:
- the fact that what Milstein says may be highly controversial is not an important issue. It just need to be attributed ("according to Milstein") and other points of view may be raised ("according to X, what Milstein says is wrong because"). What is very important is that only WP:RS are used and WP:V;
- you can contact Milstein and get some information from him. That may help when there are some question about the reliability of an information. Anyway what you will get from him fails WP:V. The most usable material would be articles from peers or journalists talking about Milstein.
- Pluto2012 (talk) 06:11, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!
[edit]
- Hi ! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
-- 02:01, Thursday, December 19, 2024 (UTC)
| Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
| Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
Hooray! You created your Teahouse profile!
[edit]
|
Welcome to the Teahouse Badge |
| Awarded to editors who have introduced themselves at the Wikipedia Teahouse. Guest editors with this badge show initiative and a great drive to learn how to edit Wikipedia. | |
| Thank you for introducing yourself and contributing to Wikipedia! If you have any questions feel free to drop me a line at my talk page. Happy Editing!
| |
A picture
[edit]
Hi! Here is a picture for you. This is where I found it, and if you look in the code here in the editing window you will see how I made it appear on your page: the file-name, thumb = you can write something under it, where on the page, size and text. Best, w.carter-Talk 09:47, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
More about Uri Milstein
[edit]Hi Pluto; I would like your opinion again please on my editing. Mainly I would like you to explain what you said last time that sometimes it may be asked for a direct quote, when is that sometimes? Also, as I was largely quoting only Milstein, you said it seemed a violation of impartiality. I have done significant homework, and discovered that what Milstein says is true-his books are ignored and most have no reviews to speak of, so I want to know; should it be kept as is, or would it be better to write relevant facts about the things he writes about, and thus allowing the reader to attain a more balanced view? I particularly have in mind that Milsteins practically only source for Rabin`s fleeing the battlefield is his subordinate-Yosef Tabenkin, on whom Mistein said that he had an agenda against Rabin`s being commander, and was besides-according to Milstein-a thoroughly vile creature, and should not be considered a valid source on so sensitive a matter. Thank You Dale Stern (talk) 02:07, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hello Dale,
- sometimes it may be asked for a direct quote, when is that sometimes?
- If a constributor thinks that an affirmation introduced in an article may not be totally correct, he may ask to the contributor who introduced this to provide a quote from the source so that it can be verified.
- I was largely quoting only Milstein (...) - his books are ignored and most have no reviews to speak of - would it be better to write relevant facts
- If Milstein books are ignored, it means that his peers do not consider what he writes and what he thinks nowadays as reliable or relevant. That's a problem for your editing because that means that Milstein cannot be used on wikipedia. In practice that means that the material from Milstein could only be used in the article directly dealing with him, ie in the article Uri Milstein. And even there, it is better to report what people says about Milstein rathter than what Milstein says about his works...
- sometimes it may be asked for a direct quote, when is that sometimes?
- Pluto2012 (talk) 17:39, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Dale Stern. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)