User talk:Rajoub570

Calligraphy as the image for people

Please do not use calligraphy as the image for people. MOS:CALLIGRAPHY and related Islam-specific guidelines, and standard guidelines for all of Wikipedia, tell us that it's ok not to have an image at all, and that an image should generally be what the article topic actually is rather than how some anonymous person on the internet chooses to write their name. DMacks (talk) 09:07, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And if it's like that on Arabic Wikipedia, can't it be like that here too? Rajoub570 (talk) 09:37, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that in this edit to Tabuk, Saudi Arabia, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 07:25, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This paragraph seems really strange and not suitable for Wikipedia Rajoub570 (talk) 09:36, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

== Welcome! ==

Hi Rajoub570! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

I've noticed that you've expressed an interest in the Palestine/Israel conflict. Unfortunately, due to a history of conflict and disruptive editing it has been designated a contentious topic and is subject to some strict rules.

The rule that affects you most as new or IP editor is the prohibition on making any edit related to Palestine/Israel conflict unless you are logged into an account and that account is at least 30 days old and has made at least 500 edits.

This prohibition is broadly construed, so it includes edits such as adding the reaction of a public figure concerning the conflict to their article or noting the position of a company or organization as it relates to the conflict.

The exception to this rule is that you may request a specific change to an article on the talk page of that article or at this page. Please ensure that your requested edit complies with our neutral point of view and reliable sourcing policies, and if the edit is about a living person our policies on biographies of living people as well.

Any edits you make contrary to these rules are likely to be reverted, and repeated violations can lead to your being blocked from editing.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Selfstudier (talk) 11:55, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grossman's chapter in Shomron Studies

Hi. I'd like to verify your recent edits on demographics and also learn more about migrations into or within the Palestine region (Edit: or, more specifically, the West Bank). I was unsuccessful after some googling to access the book or at least the chapter/article by Grossman you cited, and there isn't an Israeli library near me. So I wonder if you know of any way the book, or at least the article, could be accessed online (preferably for free)? (It doesn't have to be in English; I can read Hebrew as well).

Thank you and have a good day.-- Arpose (talk) 14:38, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~ Hi Arpose. It's cool to find Wikipedia editors into the same stuff as me! About your question, I got lucky and found an actual copy of the book. Luckily, the Hebrew is pretty straightforward, so you don't need to be an expert. I remember seeing a copy online on Kotar, but I believe it's behind a paywall. Try using this link: https://kotar.cet.ac.il/kotarapp/index/Chapter.aspx?nBookID=100386206&nTocEntryID=100389518. Rajoub570 (talk) 14:45, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The link is already on my browser history I'm afraid. But thank you for replying. -- Arpose (talk) 21:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rajoub, and thank you for your many recent additions to Palestinian village articles. It’s always been a subject of great interest for me. A couple questions regarding the Grossman source, since I cannot access it myself:

1. What sources does the author cite for his information about villagers' origins? It seems to be based on oral traditions, and if so, this should at least be noted in our articles.

2. When he says the inhabitants of a particular village originate from this or that place, as with Jinsafut, for example, is he qualifying it as “some”, “many”, or “most” of the village's inhabitants? If so, we need to qualify in our articles as well. Regards, Al Ameer (talk) 15:45, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for your message. It was a wonderful and extremely interesting thing to do.

The information comes from a very long appendix that follows the article, and includes almost all villages in Palestine mentioned in Ottoman period sources, even those already in ruins in the 19th century. It includes a few demographic and historical details of each village, sometimes in one sentence, and sometimes in an entire paragraph, using sources like Ottoman tax records, Jordanian censuses, previous studies, and the author's own observations. Sometimes, the author mentions specific sources for clan origins, like Couroyer R.P.B., and مصطفى مراد الدباغ (specifically based on بلادنا فلسطين). When the information is described as directly based on oral traditions, I mentioned it too.
Yes, I made sure to use the exact same qualifications he used. See for example Rummanah, Faqqua, and Meithalun.

Rajoub570 (talk) 17:18, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prior accounts

Have you used any other account on Wikipedia? nableezy - 14:25, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nableezy I don’t think he’s Tombah : https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArticles_for_deletion%2FIsraeli_humanitarian_aid_to_Gaza&diff=1198222520&oldid=1198197178 Wafflefrites (talk) 15:15, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also @Nableezy this user’s user page says he is from Palestine and is Muslim. Wafflefrites (talk) 16:23, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

I didn't use another account on Wikipedia. Why? Rajoub570 (talk) 09:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your editing reminds me of a banned editor who has since resorted to sockpuppetry. nableezy - 09:43, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

banned user who may have resorted to sock puppetry. I think you only identified one other user as him. I don’t agree with the other one you identified. The other one didn’t seem as knowledgeable about genetics of Jews.

Rajoub, I think nableezy is suspicious because you have edited many of the same pages as a banned user, and you have recently made significant contributions to an article the banned user created (Origin of the Palestinians). Wafflefrites (talk) 14:32, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really know how to respond. I'm sure I'm not the only Palestinian on Wikipedia who is interested in my history and my religion. Rajoub570 (talk) 14:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wafflefrites you can obfuscate all you like, but Tombah has socked repeatedly and had multiple socks blocked. I’m not too concerned about convincing you of anything, but I’ll be opening an SPI about this soon. nableezy - 14:45, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought Tombah was Jewish from Israel and this one is Muslim from Palestine. I wasn’t aware that Tombah repeatedly socked. I do believe AHJ repeatedly socked.

It can be hard to verify who people are online. I’m not sure editing the same pages always means two people are the same person. They could be reading from the same history books. Wafflefrites (talk) 14:50, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And if I say I am Jesus Christ risen again does that make it true? Anyway, there’s a bridge to Brooklyn I’m offering for sale at my user talk page, if you’d like to discuss anything with me meet me there. I’d rather not continue this here. nableezy - 15:02, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Nabeel, What is SPI? Rajoub570 (talk) 15:03, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My username is Nableezy, but you can see here. nableezy - 17:35, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I was wrong, and I apologize for the intrusion. nableezy - 13:58, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, and thanks for letting me know. Rajoub570 (talk) 16:34, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Woohoo! 1 point for me, 0 points for nableezy! I have read of David Grossman too. He wrote “Rural Arab Demography and Early Jewish Settlement in Palestine” [1] Wafflefrites (talk) 02:37, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

adding material with no source

Why are you adding material with a citation needed as here for example? nableezy - 16:47, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Still asking this question, why are you adding material and including a cn tag? nableezy - 14:13, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I translated this from Arabic Wikipedia. Did I do anything wrong? By the way, are you an administrator or something? If not, why are you tracking my edits? You apologized for the intrusion, but now you are doing it again. Rajoub570 (talk) 15:32, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve written about a number of mosques in Egypt and I watch those pages, I am not tracking your edit but I saw an addition that included a citation needed in it. If you do not have a source for something you should not be adding it to an article. nableezy - 16:05, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is the kind of stuff you're supposed to discuss on the article's talk page. Please leave my page for urgent, personal stuff only. Rajoub570 (talk) 16:25, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The actual edit yes, for an article talk page, the behavior of not following WP:V is for a user talk page, but thats no problem, next time I can skip the discuss an issue with a user so that it doesnt escalate beyond a polite exchange on a user talk page if you insist. nableezy - 16:26, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey . Just some note on the Palestinian origins article.

I noticed that you added back this oft-quoted statement by some prominent Hamas official back , despite being told that it wasn't a proper source .

I just want to say that per Wikipedia RS , WP:Undue Weight , WP:Fringe rules : the source just doesn't have much of a justification to be here, even with these additional new sources .

A Politician of a non-academic background , speaking in front of an Egyptian News-channel , begging for aid by appealing to alleged common blood-ties just .. punches way below its weight , saying the least without typing too much . The fact the only ones quoting him are pro-Israeli polemicists should have made this clearer .

The interview is best removed due to its politically-charged nature . It's a sad fact that none of the sources are not reputable as well as to justify keeping it .

This also includes this article in Ecumenical review Journal , whose author tone is not at least a Middle-Eastern history authority , not dispassionate, and not a rigorous analysis with verifiable citations and references , where even the passing section related to Israel/Palestine states things wrongly . (Abd Al-Ghani Salam -not Salameh- is a Lebanese , not a Palestinian . There's also no such source called "Official P.A. TV, special broadcast for the 100th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, November 1, 2017" ) .

Even if the above may be ignored : WP:False balance and WP:Best sources rules argue in favor of removal .

188.54.78.153 (talk) 00:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	At the beginning of this year we had 5000 words on Petra but zero on its people. Thank you for making that right! – Joe (talk) 13:41, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Coming back after a few weeks break and seeing this is great, thank you very much for the kind words! Rajoub570 (talk) 08:37, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

D. Grossman

Since you are adding material from a D. Grossman all over the place, could you please start an article about him on en.wp? I believe it is this guy: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q125872347, if so, he has an article on he.wp, you could possibly translate? Huldra (talk) 21:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Huldra there is a wikipedia article about David Grossman, his degree and specialization is philosophy and theatre, not related to history, the publisher of the same D grossman work is also not notable, so the source fails WP:RS because neither the author is writing in his field of expertise nor the publisher is a notable source. Stephan rostie (talk) 12:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Stephan rostie: That is a different person of the same name. We want David Grossman the geographer. His Hebrew article is here. Zero^talk 12:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this good idea. I will do it someday when I find more time Rajoub570 (talk) 09:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What's the deal already ?

Do us both a favor , and admit that revision is now just a deprecated draft. It has been superseded by most of the meaningful metrics by the revision you reverted.

If there are any desirable changes : it's best to do them on the proper revision , and not jumping back weeks for whatever random reason other than "no page count" (which it isn't) and petty reasons that don't justify shaving off 60% of an article , (including the body).

You know what ? .. I am not going to do half measures saying " This will be reported " and let this drag on any longer .. Let's do it now by calling in some experts , and settle this.

@Zero0000 , @Skitash , @Iskandar323 . We hate to trouble you , but we have a months old dispute verging on an edit war that's should have been obviously resolved weeks ago , but it hasn't , and Rajoub wants to pick it up again. We want to resolve it , via a third or more opinions.

Here's the revision Rajoub has reverted , and here's the one he insists on restoring ,

Please take your time to compare the revisions , and at least someone gives us a verdict on which one better fulfils Verifiability , Reliable Sources , and Neutral Language , as well as faithfully representing sources, and not omitting/censoring crucial details them.

Thank you all for your time. TheCuratingEditor (talk) 23:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To editor TheCuratingEditor: Per WP:CANVASS it is not considered proper to call other editors in this manner. If you want more eyes, post a message on the talk page of an appropriate project or start an WP:RFC. Whatever you do, you both need to stop reverting before some administrator other than me gives you a slap. Zero^talk 13:01, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I actually found the proper protocol on some other place a couple of hours ago. I did feel some bureaucracy was missing , or that the way I did it was just too easy.

I think for a better chance to represent all possible opinions impartially on the best revision without possible votestacking , an RfC might be better.

Thanks Zero. TheCuratingEditor (talk) 15:50, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]