355:
getting the reaction, but his widely distributed polemical essays, which find a home not only on anti-Zionist sites but antisemitic ones as well (Stormfront, David Irving, David Duke, etc.) The "allegations" section is meant as a demonstration of the various threads of classically antisemitic discourse Atzmon has absorbed and regurgitated, sometimes in "anti-Zionist" form and sometimes not, into these polemics: deicide, Holocaust denial, the world-control myth. None of these topics are anything but tangentially tied to Beirut or other biographical moments of Atzmon's life, but they do have a solid pedigree in the darkest moments of Jewish history. In fact, about a week ago I explicitly broke the section out by antisemitic thread, but was reverted. (Not complaining.)
256:. I would like to see less conflict on the article and more harmonious editing, so everything you can do in that regard would be helpful. One thing that worries me is that it looks like your account was created simply to edit the Atzmon article. Whether true or not, it might help if you join a WikiProject and get some experience working on other types of articles, such as articles about Israel, Jewish biographies, Jewish culture, etc. Let me know if I can point you in the right direction.
374:
guidelines. Per this approach, it is not necessary to separate allegations about his views in his published work from a critique of his work. The more embedded the criticism, the less likely we will have POV disputes. It might help to familiarize yourself with the encyclopedic style. If I can point you to any policies and guidelines which will make this easier for you, let me know. One thing that might help is to review both
537:
906:
799:
340:
could take a section like "Allegations of antisemitism" and merge it inline into the appropriate sections so that it doesn't stand alone or apart from the things it criticizes or observes. Also, based on Atzmon's own published works, I don't think it is unreasonable to conclude that Atzmon is antisemitic, anti-Zionist, and at the end of the day, anti-Jewish.
139:
324:
Let me repeat: It's not WP's place to come down on one or the other side of the fence on whether Atzmon's an antisemite. Neither is it WP's place to ignore or efface a real and substantial controversy simply because one editor has very, very strong opinions about it. It might be a helpful exercise to
304:
and it needs to be given enough space to be aired, not in its every last detail, but with enough room to accurately reflect the breadth of its substance. I believe that the article, as it stands now, does that. I do not try to deny those I disagree with enough room to make their case. I do not object
339:
From a biographical POV, I would like to know more about his experience as a paramedic during the 1982 Israeli invasion of
Lebanon, as that seems to have contributed to his current state of mind. Good sources that analyze (and criticize) his published works would also work. A good, neutral article
318:
I spell this out up front because I feel my position has been mischaracterized considerably by other editors. I do not want the article to become an attack page, I do not want it to become a list of every criticism of Atzmon ever aired, I do not want it to become a smear job; I just want it to treat
849:
I have no skin in this game and I find that comment unacceptable as well. This IS your final warning, the next time you slur another editor that way, whether the facts might be strung together a certain way or not, you will be blocked. If this had been brought to my attention prior to Malik warning
373:
Keep in mind that a biographical approach is not only needed, it's essential to the structure and composition of an encyclopedia article about a musician and author like Atzmon. I encourage you to pursue an analysis and critique of Atzmon's writing within the paradigm of
Knowledge policies and
354:
Thanks for your reply! I am not certain the autobiographical approach would make the most sense as a logical approach to the antisemitism issue; Atzmon is a polemicist, but the essays that raise the most ruckus are the least autobiographical and most "theoretical." It is not his novels that are
358:
So the case could be made that the "Allegations" section actually belongs as a subsection of "Writings" since that it is the writings that prompted the allegations. The problem here is that the "Writings" section is more about his largely ignored novels, not his widely distributed polemics.
305:
to giving Atzmon's replies to the accusations. I do however object to any effort to sanitize the controversy away as if it doesn't exist or can best be treated in only a dozen words or is merely ignorable disinfo from Atzmon's political enemies. Such a result would be a victory of
968:
deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with
Knowledge's policies and guidelines.
733:
I guess I'll have to go elsewhere to find out whether "Dealing with the nefarious influence of Israel
Firsters on Congress and in the media (which is mostly owned and/or controlled by pro-Zionists, mostly Jews) has got to be a prime goal of the peace movement."
294:
from leading UK anti-Zionists, from leftists and from rightists, from Jews and from non-Jews. And it is also my position, and not a position I take lightly or without considerable study of the specifics of Atzmon's writings and of the history of antisemitic
717:
However, most edits revert something, which is probably why people usually stop after 3 a day, just in case. So you are only up to 3 for today; correct me if I'm wrong. A simple explanation instead of personal attacks would be more appropriate.
1003:
I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on
Knowledge that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.
223:
shows what looks to me like a rather significant gulf between what it calls a personal attack and what you do. Nevertheless, I have apologized to Carol for unintentionally suggesting she's associated with such a creepy creature as Atzmon.
271:
Hi, Viriditas. I hope this 'thank you' makes your task at least slightly less thankless: thank you for spending time on the Atzmon issue. Let me explain my position on the GA article so that you don't have to reverse engineer it from my
550:
prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the
277:
I do not think anti-Zionism and antisemitism are the same thing. However, there are cases -- rare, but they exist -- where someone is simultaneously Jewish, anti-Zionist, and antisemitic. Maybe the obvious example is the late
989:
I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they effect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take 5 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at
41:
No, I am not a previously banned user or even an experienced editor; I'm simply someone who's had enough experience with markup languages -- HTML, XML, several different wiki formats etc. -- and has installed enough
432:
As you can see if you look a little more closely, in the version you just reverted I had absolutely removed the words "Jewish deicide," yet you reverted it anyway, claiming that it did. Please look more closely.
850:
you I would have just blocked you then and there, but I do not believe in blocking right after a warning, so you get another chance to behave. Don't waste it. Comment on the content, not the contributor. ++
603:"Dealing with the nefarious influence of Israel Firsters on Congress and in the media (which is mostly owned and/or controlled by pro-Zionists, mostly Jews) has got to be a prime goal of the peace movement"
36:
I find it terribly unfortunate that you introduce yourself to a complete stranger with a strident and venomous accusation of bad faith. Is that your typical mode of social operation? I certainly hope not.
708:
OK so I misinterpreted 3RR to mean edits instead of reverts. Considering all the times I've seen people war other people after only 3 edits a day, I was surprised to see that it turns out you are right.
958:(just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on
290:-backed opinion that Gilad Atzmon is one of them, that at some point in the last decade he crossed the line from anti-Zionism into antisemitism. This opinion comes from both leading UK Zionists
50:
laptop I'm writing this from) to be able to pick up the formatting in a flash. Not yet perfectly -- I have some tune-up to do on the references on the Atzmon page -- but not bad for a newbie.
319:
the antisemitism controversy in a fair, NPOV way. I understand that by focusing on one topic I take a credibility hit, one I hope that I make up for by the strength of my argument.
21:
Obviously you are an experienced editor. Given the questionable and prejudicial nature of some of your edits, I have to wonder if you have edited here previously and been banned?
998:
876:
155:
300:
It's not WP's place to come down on one or the other side of the fence on whether Atzmon's an antisemite. However, the controversy is real and substantial, backed by
99:-article. Or into any article, other than the subject himself. If you do that again, I will report you and ask to have you topic-banned. Have a nice day.
282:
in later life, when he was off his rocker and fulminating about
Zionist conspiracies. Another example is a Holocaust denier who writes under the name
929:
925:
895:
975:
885:
825:
760:
499:
469:
422:
202:
164:
416:
attribute that description to somebody who has made it. ("Smith described Atzmon's statement as an accusation of Jewish deicide.") —
999:
http://uchicago.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_eXOHLbXwbpfYC1f?Q_DL=e3DsAymc9y4ljrD_eXOHLbXwbpfYC1f_MLRP_8Dge5dchoVgqCH3&Q_CHL=gl
479:
Exactly how many times am I supposed to pretend not notice that an editor is defending the rank antisemitism of a rank antisemite?
597:
Ah, so you're bringing your edit wars to the user talk pages too? Spamming every noticeboard from here to
Timbuktu wasn't enough?
412:
describe a statement by Atzmon as an accusation of Jewish deicide. ("Atzmon, in an accusation of Jewish deicide, said...") We
556:
715:
A "revert" in the context of this rule means any edit (or administrative action) that reverses the actions of other editors,
581:
Note:You made 4 reverts, some of a questionable nature that have been reverted by two other editors. Please review policies.
913:
809:
174:"Maybe you should suggest that to him" is a personal attack? !?!? Maybe I'm not the one who needs advice on keeping cool.
143:
408:
You seem confused between what
Knowledge can say in the "editorial voice" and what it can attribute to others. Knowledge
564:
568:
933:
859:
814:
783:
574:
325:
find out whether the other editors you're communicating with agree, so that we can proceed from common ground.
306:
912:
Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Knowledge has a strict policy against
723:
675:
633:
587:
552:
547:
542:
26:
970:
917:
880:
820:
755:
494:
464:
417:
197:
159:
835:
Nonsense. Point me to anything in that comment you reverted that was false. I can back up every fact.
1012:
625:
652:
No immediate report whether any of them are mostly owned and/or controlled by mostly Jews, though.
560:
387:
345:
261:
939:
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding
719:
671:
629:
621:
583:
456:
253:
147:
115:
22:
104:
1008:
944:
460:
875:
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at
286:. There aren't many in this category, but there are some. And there is a substantial and
383:
375:
341:
310:
257:
536:
855:
779:
710:
449:
379:
283:
279:
220:
154:, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please
92:
646:
928:. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our
529:
508:
Excellent! When it comes to antisemitism, Knowledge takes a neutral point of view.
301:
287:
249:
96:
84:
72:
954:
899:
836:
735:
685:
653:
607:
509:
480:
434:
360:
326:
225:
175:
118:
100:
56:
905:
798:
991:
88:
684:
Is it mostly owned and/or controlled by mostly Jews, like the media, Carol?
43:
879:
regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —
770:
Seconded. You need to find a more constructive approach than posts such as
563:
among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek
851:
775:
649:
138:
643:
47:
46:
installations on various machines (including, half a year ago, on the
1016:
979:
889:
862:
844:
829:
786:
764:
743:
727:
693:
679:
661:
637:
615:
591:
517:
503:
488:
473:
442:
426:
391:
368:
349:
334:
265:
233:
206:
183:
168:
126:
108:
64:
30:
114:
You have badly misunderstood the situation. Discussion moved to
819:. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. —
555:. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to
382:. Feel free to contact me with any questions or suggestions.
774:. There's a disturbing pattern here, and it needs to stop. ++
192:
Suggesting that Carol knows Atzmon or is associated with him
964:
explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for
904:
455:
Please refrain from making personal attacks, as you did at
992:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics
771:
606:
Do Jews "mostly" own and/or control the media, Carol?
806:
you will receive regarding your disruptive comments.
567:, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request
158:and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. —
559:to work towards wording and content that gains a
877:Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
955:the page that has been nominated for deletion
8:
459:. Further attacks will result in your being
540:You currently appear to be engaged in an
667:
7:
936:from editing Knowledge. Thank you.
668:User_talk:RTLamp#No_personal_attacks
55:Thanks for asking. Have a nice day!
711:Knowledge:3rr#The_three-revert_rule
14:
571:. If the edit warring continues,
493:Keep it up and I'll block you. —
797:
535:
248:Hi. I appreciate your edits to
137:
404:Editorial voice vs. attribution
1007:Sincere thanks for your help!
87:-sources, like the opinion of
1:
930:biographies of living persons
557:discuss controversial changes
146:other editors, as you did at
812:on other people, you may be
83:introduce material from non-
642:Three travel destinations:
628:posting should be removed.
1032:
980:18:58, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
754:Please stop. Just stop. —
127:17:03, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
109:16:52, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
65:03:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
31:02:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
1017:19:50, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
890:22:22, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
863:20:33, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
845:17:52, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
830:17:45, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
787:00:50, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
765:16:57, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
744:19:20, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
728:18:47, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
694:16:57, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
680:16:55, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
662:16:48, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
638:16:34, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
616:16:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
592:16:00, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
579:without further notice.
518:22:37, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
504:22:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
489:21:57, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
474:19:27, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
443:03:30, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
427:03:13, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
840:
808:If you continue to make
739:
689:
657:
611:
513:
484:
438:
392:04:00, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
369:22:47, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
364:
350:22:19, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
335:21:51, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
330:
266:21:07, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
229:
179:
122:
60:
234:15:58, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
207:04:14, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
184:04:12, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
169:04:05, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
909:
817:without further notice
924:by Knowledge and are
908:
252:and your comments on
196:a personal attack. —
17:Your editing history?
815:blocked from editing
600:Here's my question.
450:No personal attacks
910:
565:dispute resolution
95:-article like the
922:are not tolerated
707:<backdent: -->
553:three-revert rule
548:three-revert rule
457:Talk:Gilad Atzmon
254:Talk:Gilad Atzmon
148:Talk:Gilad Atzmon
116:Talk:Gilad Atzmon
1023:
950:
949:
943:
926:speedily deleted
914:personal attacks
810:personal attacks
801:
546:. Note that the
539:
528:Edit warring on
307:WP:Wikilawyering
141:
1031:
1030:
1026:
1025:
1024:
1022:
1021:
1020:
987:
978:
947:
941:
940:
932:policy will be
903:
896:Speedy deletion
888:
873:
828:
795:
763:
752:
569:page protection
533:
502:
472:
453:
425:
406:
246:
205:
167:
135:
77:
19:
12:
11:
5:
1029:
1027:
986:
983:
974:
902:
898:nomination of
893:
884:
872:
869:
868:
867:
866:
865:
824:
807:
794:
791:
790:
789:
759:
751:
748:
747:
746:
705:
704:
703:
702:
701:
700:
699:
698:
697:
696:
604:
601:
598:
532:
526:
525:
524:
523:
522:
521:
520:
498:
468:
452:
447:
446:
445:
421:
405:
402:
401:
400:
399:
398:
397:
396:
395:
394:
356:
321:
320:
315:
314:
297:
296:
274:
273:
245:
242:
241:
240:
239:
238:
237:
236:
212:
211:
210:
209:
201:
187:
186:
163:
142:Please do not
134:
131:
130:
129:
79:Please do not
76:
69:
68:
67:
52:
51:
38:
37:
18:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1028:
1019:
1018:
1014:
1010:
1005:
1001:
1000:
997:Survey Link:
995:
993:
985:Survey Invite
984:
982:
981:
977:
972:
971:Malik Shabazz
967:
963:
962:
961:the talk page
957:
956:
946:
937:
935:
931:
927:
923:
919:
915:
907:
901:
897:
894:
892:
891:
887:
882:
881:Malik Shabazz
878:
870:
864:
861:
857:
853:
848:
847:
846:
842:
838:
834:
833:
832:
831:
827:
822:
821:Malik Shabazz
818:
816:
811:
805:
804:final warning
800:
792:
788:
785:
781:
777:
773:
769:
768:
767:
766:
762:
757:
756:Malik Shabazz
749:
745:
741:
737:
732:
731:
730:
729:
725:
721:
716:
712:
695:
691:
687:
683:
682:
681:
677:
673:
669:
665:
664:
663:
659:
655:
651:
648:
645:
641:
640:
639:
635:
631:
627:
626:WP:Harassment
623:
619:
618:
617:
613:
609:
605:
602:
599:
596:
595:
594:
593:
589:
585:
582:
578:
576:
570:
566:
562:
558:
554:
549:
545:
544:
538:
531:
527:
519:
515:
511:
507:
506:
505:
501:
496:
495:Malik Shabazz
492:
491:
490:
486:
482:
478:
477:
476:
475:
471:
466:
465:Malik Shabazz
462:
458:
451:
448:
444:
440:
436:
431:
430:
429:
428:
424:
419:
418:Malik Shabazz
415:
411:
403:
393:
389:
385:
381:
377:
372:
371:
370:
366:
362:
357:
353:
352:
351:
347:
343:
338:
337:
336:
332:
328:
323:
322:
317:
316:
312:
308:
303:
299:
298:
293:
289:
285:
284:Israel Shamir
281:
280:Bobby Fischer
276:
275:
270:
269:
268:
267:
263:
259:
255:
251:
243:
235:
231:
227:
222:
218:
217:
216:
215:
214:
213:
208:
204:
199:
198:Malik Shabazz
195:
191:
190:
189:
188:
185:
181:
177:
173:
172:
171:
170:
166:
161:
160:Malik Shabazz
157:
153:
150:. Comment on
149:
145:
140:
132:
128:
124:
120:
117:
113:
112:
111:
110:
106:
102:
98:
94:
90:
86:
82:
74:
70:
66:
62:
58:
54:
53:
49:
45:
40:
39:
35:
34:
33:
32:
28:
24:
16:
1006:
1002:
996:
988:
965:
960:
959:
952:
938:
921:
918:Attack pages
911:
874:
813:
803:
802:This is the
796:
753:
750:Carolmooredc
720:CarolMooreDC
714:
706:
672:CarolMooreDC
647:Kettle River
630:CarolMooreDC
584:CarolMooreDC
580:
577:from editing
572:
541:
534:
530:Gilad Atzmon
454:
413:
409:
407:
291:
250:Gilad Atzmon
247:
244:SPA concerns
193:
151:
136:
97:Gilad Atzmon
80:
78:
23:CarolMooreDC
20:
953:the top of
920:and images
900:User:RTLamp
666:Please see
573:you may be
1009:Porteclefs
622:WP:Soapbox
295:discourse.
219:A look at
89:David Duke
793:July 2010
650:Black, WV
561:consensus
384:Viriditas
342:Viriditas
258:Viriditas
156:stay cool
91:, into a
44:MediaWiki
772:this one
543:edit war
133:May 2010
75:-sources
934:blocked
837:RT-LAMP
736:RT-LAMP
686:RT-LAMP
654:RT-LAMP
608:RT-LAMP
575:blocked
510:RT-LAMP
481:RT-LAMP
461:blocked
435:RT-LAMP
376:WP:NPOV
361:RT-LAMP
327:RT-LAMP
311:WP:NPOV
226:RT-LAMP
176:RT-LAMP
152:content
119:RT-LAMP
57:RT-LAMP
48:MacBook
966:speedy
945:hangon
410:cannot
380:WP:BLP
272:edits.
221:WP:NPA
144:attack
101:Huldra
93:WP:BLP
976:Stalk
886:Stalk
826:Stalk
761:Stalk
620:This
500:Stalk
470:Stalk
423:Stalk
309:over
302:WP:RS
288:WP:RS
203:Stalk
165:Stalk
85:WP:RS
73:WP:RS
1013:talk
871:AN/I
841:talk
740:talk
724:talk
690:talk
676:talk
658:talk
634:talk
624:and
612:talk
588:talk
514:talk
485:talk
463:. —
439:talk
388:talk
378:and
365:talk
346:talk
331:talk
262:talk
230:talk
180:talk
123:talk
105:talk
81:ever
71:non-
61:talk
27:talk
951:to
852:Lar
776:Lar
644:POT
414:can
292:and
1015:)
994:.
969:—
948:}}
942:{{
916:.
854::
843:)
778::
742:)
726:)
713::
692:)
678:)
670:.
660:)
636:)
614:)
590:)
516:)
487:)
441:)
390:)
367:)
348:)
333:)
264:)
232:)
194:is
182:)
125:)
107:)
63:)
29:)
1011:(
973:/
883:/
860:c
858:/
856:t
839:(
823:/
784:c
782:/
780:t
758:/
738:(
722:(
688:(
674:(
656:(
632:(
610:(
586:(
512:(
497:/
483:(
467:/
437:(
420:/
386:(
363:(
344:(
329:(
313:.
260:(
228:(
200:/
178:(
162:/
121:(
103:(
59:(
25:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
