User talk:Makeandtoss/Archive 1

Wine Template

I removed Palestine from the template. The template is for active wine regions. We should not be including historic regions in the template it would get too messy. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 17:29, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

@Sir Joseph:Then I will include today's active Palestinian wine industry into the article Makeandtoss (talk) 17:47, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

@Sir Joseph: done. Makeandtoss (talk) 18:07, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Your edit on Greater Israel

Thank you. Please see my comment Talk:Greater_Israel#Maps_without_Source addressing the same, and no followup comments. Grammar'sLittleHelper (talk) 20:49, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

@Sfarney: Thanks, I nominated it for deletion on commons.. Makeandtoss (talk) 20:52, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

The remaining map has the same problem. Grammar'sLittleHelper (talk) 21:27, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Davids-kingdom.jpg this one? Makeandtoss (talk) 21:30, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes. It is the bedrock of the article. It does not agree with the text ("from the brook of Egypt to the Euphrates") -- the map does not extend to Egypt. Why draw the border to connect to that part of the Euphrates, when the river extends from the Persian Gulf almost to Turkey? It doesn't say, nor does it refer to any source for the choice. OR? Grammar'sLittleHelper (talk) 23:01, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

@Sfarney: Anyone can edit the picture... Take a look at the image history Makeandtoss (talk) 23:03, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

@Makeandtoss: Then that is even worse! Where is the authority for that?? Grammar'sLittleHelper (talk) 23:53, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Haha! What a circus! Grammar'sLittleHelper (talk) 23:55, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

@Sfarney:[1] I guess you should join the discussion. I am not really knowledgable in this field... Makeandtoss (talk) 23:56, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm there, and editors are not experts by definition or vocation. We know how to find experts, and we always cite references. Regardless of the "expert" editor, a map without authority is just someone's opinion. Like facebook or pinterest. Or your local pub. The image history is priceless! Thanks for that. Grammar'sLittleHelper (talk) 00:17, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

@Sfarney: Lol, worse! It belong to a blogspot or some propaganda site. Makeandtoss (talk) 00:54, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

January 2016

Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on Mudar Zahran. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. This edit summary is unacceptable. Drmies (talk) 17:13, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

@Drmies: I did assume good faith for Smartse, 3 months ago. After having several discussions with him, it became quite obvious that he has no good faith in editing. His last edit was done now because he wants to benefit from the period where the article would be protected. Makeandtoss (talk) 17:20, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm glad you did, and it would behoove you to continue doing so. This nonsense about a Facebook group is ridiculous. "Last edit" makes no sense anyway since protection ran out on 29 December, and Smartse's last edit was 31 January; even if it did I don't understand what you are trying to argue. But it's immaterial anyway: your accusation is unacceptable and I urge you not to repeat it, or make similar remarks. BTW, I am about to semi-protect the article anyway: there is too much trolling and socking going on. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 17:25, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

@Drmies: Don't worry. I dont make baseless accusations. If you insist, I can send you the EXACT facebook profile of the german IP!!! I know these gang, they think they are smart. Makeandtoss (talk) 17:28, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Well, that would mean Smartse gets around a bit. See User:Smartse#Alternative_accounts. I don't insist on anything except that you don't make such accusations; if you think there is something that needs to be looked into and it involves linking IPs to accounts, you better keep that off-wiki. Drmies (talk) 17:47, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

@Drmies: Don't worry I know I am not allowed to link a name to an IP. Here you go, here's a tiny example. This is very very clear, both on December 1st.[2], [3]. I even know who the Canadian IP belongs to!! Makeandtoss (talk) 17:53, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

No, it is not clear. I don't know which Canadian IP you mean, and I don't really care. What you have is a tweet by the subject and a revert by Smartse--a revert that comes after this edit, which removed content removed much earlier already as a BLP violation, if memory serves, and which you then undo with a false claim of vandalism. Smartse's edit comes after you and that other editor go back and forth: it is Smartse's job to prevent BLP violations.

So you have given an incomplete account of what happened, and your suggestion of causation, that the tweet and Smartse's edit have something to do with each other, is untenable. Who knows, maybe the subject has friends or whatever, but you have no proof whatsoever that Smartse is one of the--to put it mildly. I really, really suggest you stop. I am sure you are aware of the discretionary sanctions authorized by ArbCom for that article (under WP:ARBPIA--specifically Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Palestine-Israel_articles#Final_decision), and I will not hesitate to topic-ban you from this and perhaps other articles. At this moment, I think you are at least guilty of playing fast and loose with the BLP, if you're not in outright violation of it; you've been edit-warring on that article for quite some time; you are failing to assume good faith; and you are threatening to out other editors. Please don't think this is not serious. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 18:11, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

@Drmies: As I said, that is a tiny example. I underwent several discussions over the period of months in order to get things correct, in alot of examples; Smartse suddenly refused to continue discussion on talk page, he also rejected participating in an dispute resolution that I initiated. Smartse is doing absolutely nothing to solve this conflict, he just prefers to revert. His latest revert, he claimed that the sources are primary and that the content doesn't have weight. I reverted him because he did not even care to check the sources, the last two were not primary. You accusing me of edit warring is obscene and I suggest that you turn this accusation to someone else. Someone perhaps like the ones operating a sockpuppetry network or the ones rejecting discussion.Makeandtoss (talk) 20:01, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

• Ah, I wish you had stopped before the last sentence. I mean, claiming you weren't edit warring is silly, but that claim isn't disruptive, but then you had to go and make the same accusation you did before--an accusation I have warned you to stop repeating. I am hereby banning you from editing Mudar Zahran and its talk page, and from the topic of this person in any other article, broadly construed, for the next six months. You can see what options for an appeal you have in Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctions#Appeals_and_modifications. To be clear: continuing to edit this article means you will be blocked. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 04:26, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

@Drmies: What! I didn't accuse anyone in my last sentence, especially not Smartse of sockpuppetry.Makeandtoss (talk) 10:08, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

I disagree. You made a blanket accusation that in the context cannot be read differently. Drmies (talk) 15:12, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

@Drmies: You literally notified me, why would I accuse again!? I was saying that instead of saying that a user who constantly was open to discussion, edit warred, against people who preferred other means.. Makeandtoss (talk) 15:52, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

@Drmies:...Makeandtoss (talk) 18:10, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

@Drmies: WP:ADMINACCT Makeandtoss (talk) 20:59, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't know why you would accuse someone or some group of editors again. What else do you want me to say? I've explained myself. Drmies (talk) 02:14, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Makeandtoss, My advice is to just accept this sanction, which is within Drmies' reasonable discretion. Also, the article clearly comes under ARBPIA since the main reason this person is famous outside Jordan is his pronouncements on Israel/Palestine; that is enough connection. In future if you want to complain about another user's behavior, don't use talk pages or edit summaries. Take it directly to WP:AE, WP:ANI or WP:SPI. However, if the complaint involves off-wiki information that might make a link between a wikipedia editor and a real person, complain by email instead. There is a list of Checkusers at Wikipedia:Functionaries. Zero^talk 03:10, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Naji Abu Nowar

Hello! Your submission of Naji Abu Nowar at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 04:44, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Asad Ghanma

Hello! Your submission of Asad Ghanma at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Cambalachero (talk) 21:19, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

the article Allah

Hi, I am writing to you, because I have seen you comment about this issue in the talk page. I am surprised that this sentence has remained for so long without any criticism: According to Islamic belief, Allah is the proper name of God,[46] I have not checked what exactly the source says. As I stated in the talkpage, God in Islam can not have a name, that would be equivalent to idolatry, he's not a person. Allah means The God in Islam that's different from stating that the name of God is Allah, and that's what some could believe with that sentence. Yaḥyā ‎ (talk) 21:48, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Clarification, I won't go into word semantics between the and The, to simplify things I have capitalised the t because in my criticism it doesn't make a real differences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yahya Talatin (talk • contribs) 21:55, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

concerning edits

Hello Makeandtoss. I See you have reverted my edits without directly reverting me. However, it is still worryingly uneven and the article is still contradictory. You have removed a academic R/S and replaced it with a questionably accurate newspaper source. The camp was largely destroyed and the IDF achieved its primary goal and withdrew while in contact with Jordanian forces. Hardly a rout. Even the mangled photo caption has been restored. I expect some discussion please. I note there is no consensus on the T/P. We have worked together before, and I am no POV warrior as all would agree in the I/P community (hopefully), but this article is still flawed by it's inherent contradictions. Regards! Simon Irondome (talk) 15:24, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Pictures on the right hand side

Pics go on the right hand side of the page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Images#Location

Anticla rutila (talk) 11:34, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

@Anticla rutila: The pics should be generally on the right but not always.. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:27, 9 April 2016 (UTC) @Anticla rutila: The map is redundant.. Makeandtoss (talk) 14:56, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Re Mansaf being Jordanian or Jordanian and Palestinian

Hello, Makeandtoss. You have new messages at Talk:Mansaf#Jordanian_or_Jordanian_and_Palestinian.3F.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WikiArabia 2016

Hi, I'd like to invite you to attend/ organize WikiArabia 2016 conference which will be held in Amman on Thursday 24.3.2016. Please tell me if you are in Jordan or not. --Freedom's Falcon (talk) 14:53, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@Freedom's Falcon: I am in Jordan, tell me more about the conference.. Makeandtoss (talk) 15:00, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Please have a look here. I do believe it's a good opportunity to have Jordanian Wikipedians write in other languages beside Arabic. Looking forward to your attendance and participation. --Freedom's Falcon (talk) 19:45, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

@Freedom's Falcon: I did have a look at that.. I am not sure if any of that would be of my interest, as it appears that it focuses on Wikimedia as a whole. Or am I wrong? What about location/amount of attendance of conference? Makeandtoss (talk) 20:07, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Let me introduce myself. My name is Mervat Salman, WikiArabia 2016 organizer, May be you have looked at an incomplete schedule. Any way, we have put some goals that we will try to achieve in this conference, among which is to empower Arab users, enhance their engagement in international communities, and teach them something new, this is why we have arranged for some lectures on using advanced tools and some technical stuff. The conference itself is a great chance for people to meet, discuss, share ideas and experiences, etc., otherwise, I wouldn't have known about you from Nidhal. I wish you could give it a try and share us with your experience as an editor in non-Arabic language. Regards, --Mervat Salman (talk) 20:21, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't agree with you @Makeandtoss:, As Mervat mentioned, The conference will focus on Wikipedia challenges, programs in Arab World and regional initiatives,... etc.
Anyway, It will be held at Days Inn Hotel if you're interested. Thanks. --Freedom's Falcon (talk) 20:27, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

@Freedom's Falcon: @Mervat Salman: Unfortunately, I am busy on Thursday 24th but I might be able to show up on Friday though. I might also be interested in any meetups. Tell me if there's anything I can do to help, cheers. --Makeandtoss (talk) 21:02, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Al-Mazraa, Syria

Hi, at Talk:Al-Mazraa there is a problem about the name of Syrian town. Perhaps it can be solved by some searching in Arabic. Cheers. Zero^talk 12:37, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

@Zero0000: I didn't understand what the dispute is about.. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:45, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

It is not a dispute. We just want to know about the name of this place, because it seems to have changed. If possible, we would like a source that explains the name change. Zero^talk 13:58, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Ammon

The term "Semitic people" is an archaic racialist theory, read the page yourself. It does not mean what you think it means, unless what you mean is Carleton S. Coon's theory of Four Races. Ogress 21:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

@Ogress: nvm then. --Makeandtoss (talk) 22:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Yeah it's creepy, isn't it? Yikes. Most of the time people mean "Semitic-speaking peoples", sometimes they mean "West Asian". Ogress 22:08, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Haha, I just thought about it and it definitely makes no sense to have a Semetic race. Makeandtoss (talk) 22:22, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

It is not about race. It is only about speakers of any Semitic language. Some users made something awthul of Semitic people article, while it was nice earlier. Cathry (talk) 18:57, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

There is a separate page for ancient Semitic speakers, as I have already noted. And no, it's explicitly a racialist term. Also, Cathry, if you keep stalking my edits I'm going to report you. Ogress 20:23, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

I am stalking articles I interested in. Cathry (talk) 20:44, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

My.Kali

Marhaba. I really don't know if there was an actual stand-alone article. But I took most of the information from our article LGBT rights in Jordan as I deemed My.Kali was a notable magazine on its own. Feel free to add to it or amend if you deem necessary. werldwayd (talk) 16:05, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

• What's important is that we do have an article now. My searches for other versions of the article did not surface any results. So this is the one were gonna have on English Wikipedia I guess. By the way If you do find the other article you can always redirect to that one as it is an earlier version and has precedence over this. I want to draw your attention to the small paragraph about the magazine in Arabic on this page of Arabic Wikipedia just this week. werldwayd (talk) 16:41, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • I added the Arabic paragraph just after establishing the page in English for the magazine. See my edit here on 28 April 2016 in Arabic Wikipedia. I would be very interested in seeing your earlier edit(s), but don't seem to find it except if you actually edited on the LGBT rights in Jordan and you are remembering that. Anyways, you can always refer to your edit history and it will show up somewhere. If you do know the approximate time in which you did do the edit, it will help you to trace it actually. Still I'm glad at least we have it in this format now at least and do add to it if you deem necessary. werldwayd (talk) 16:55, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
    • Now it's there my friend. Please do see the paragraph حقوق المثليين في الأردن right at the end. I do expect censorship for various ulterior motives, but we persevere. Time is on our side regardless of how fellow editors may try to delete certain facts. It is a collective effort after all and no one individual can stop inclusion of relevant info werldwayd (talk) 16:59, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
      • I would love to add a history section, but unfortunately do not know much about the magazine to do so myself. But if you do have any suggestions, just send me on my e-mail werldwayd@yahoo.com and I'll see using my judgement if it is worth our while to add them in full or partially on the article or not. Sorry about the editing privileges. Hope these do expire very soon and you can back editing on certain subjects you care about. Yes, I am Lebanese Armenian but have been a naturalized Canadian citizen and have resided in Montreal, Quebec for more than 15 years now. werldwayd (talk) 15:18, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
        • Here it is a separate section with some additional comments I added about Khalid, about cafes and bookstores and the media. Hopefully this will encourage further development of the section by fellow editors. Please do you use my e-mail werldwayd@yahoo.com for any special interest in developing in Wikipedia in both English and Arabic. Incidentally I run a personal Top 200 song chart http://www.1wxrld.com/ with quite a good number of gay-themed songs in it as well. Incidentally this week's number 1 is Doozi, an artist from Morocco. You can use my e-mail for the site 1wxrld at 1wxrld@gmail.com werldwayd (talk) 23:56, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

May 2016

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Jordan, you may be blocked from editing.
Thank you. — 79.177.137.186 (talk) 06:55, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Once again you reverted an edit, against consensus, disregarding discussion and other editors. Are you aware that if you'd continue your edit warring, an admin will block you? 79.177.137.186 (talk) 13:40, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Reverting 3 times in a row against consensus is against Wikipedia guidelines. You have been warned twice already. 79.177.137.186 (talk) 23:38, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Please refrain from edit warring.79.177.137.186 (talk) 23:05, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

May 2016

Your recent editing history at Amman Message shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:32, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Amman Message. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 12:31, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

@331dot: "stupid opinions" not "stupid editors". Makeandtoss (talk) 12:36, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

It still implies that the people giving the opinions are stupid; even if not, it is not helpful to the discussion. Please discuss your specific concerns and what supports them; saying something is 'stupid' is not persuasive. 331dot (talk) 12:40, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

@331dot: It does imply that the people giving the opinion are stupid, but not Mezzo, because he already said it doesn't matter to him if he likes that opinion or not.. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:42, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Please stop edit warring on the page. Your justification of an opinion being "stupid" is immature and unprofessional. If there's a valid reason for removing the material, then please explain that reason to your peers on the article talk page. Edit warring because you don't like an opinion isn't going to get you what you want. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:32, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Amman Message. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. 331dot (talk) 10:44, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

You have been warned several times. Here is another admonition. The use of ALL CAPITALS on talk pages is considered SHOUTING, and, along with failure to discuss productively, increases the likelihood of a block. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:57, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Why are you trying to make me look like I have been constantly capitalizing my letters and refusing to discuss productively? I am the literally the only one to have laid down an elaborative reasonable argument in Talk:Amman Message. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:16, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Oh I see, someone showed you a one sided view of this. Perfect!

Yes and no. Someone showed me what looked like a one-sided view. I asked for clarification. I looked at at myself, and I see that there is edit-warring, and that you are SHOUTING. I don't know who is right, but SHOUTING isn't a way to "win" a content dispute. If you have the better case, and you say that you do, I suggest engaging in civil discourse on talk pages. If anyone else has also been SHOUTING, they also need admonishing. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:54, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

My advice at this point is the same as the advice that I gave to another editor, and that is to publish a Request for Comments. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:54, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Oh waw, I "SHOUTED" once, big deal. RFC is to be used after normal discussion on talk page fails, I just laid down my argument and I am waiting for anyone opposing to lay down theirs, which you put as "engaging in civil discourse". Makeandtoss (talk) 19:07, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Arabic?

I assume you are an Arabic-speaker? (Which I am definitely not, unfortunately.) So, I need help with Arabic sources, to be particular; on Ahmad al-Qalqashandi. If you see his article, (under "External links"), his book "Ṣuhḥ al-aishā" was published in 1903, (At least, that is the year archive.org gives me.)

If you look at my User:Huldra/Barag1283: al-Qalqashandi is one of the sources for the hudna in 1283 (which is an extremely useful document, as it tells us which villages/places were populated at that time). However, Dan Barag (1979)-article refers to a al-Qalqashandi "Subh al-a'sha", published in Cairo, 1919. He refers to pp. 51-63 of that version of al-Qalqashandi.

Now, I wonder, is there a mistake here, either in archive.org, or in Dan Barag´s article, and is Dan Barag´s al-Qalqashandi-1919 source the same as which is available on archive.org as a al-Qalqashandi-1903-source?

Second question; I am working on Lod; and Petersen, 2001, gave me the reference al-Ẓāhirī, 1894, pp. 118-119 there (in the "Mamluk"-section). I´m useless, even with Arabic numbers...could you please check that the link (for al-Ẓāhirī, 1894, pp. 118-119) actually links to p. 118? (I have a nagging suspicion it does not).

Thanks, in advance! Cheers, Huldra (talk) 21:16, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

@Huldra: Yes I am a native Arabic speaker..

Haha, uhm I kind of got lost here. So I opened (under "External links"), his book "Ṣuhḥ al-aishā" and I don't think that book is what your searching for. Its about 600 pages and I have read from 51-63, it is some weird Islamic literature. I assume you are searching for history instead?

As for al-Zahiri, the linked page 118 gives me a grey screen with "Internet Archive BookReader - Zoubdat Kashf al-Mamalik: political and administrative array of Egypt " this sentence. Makeandtoss (talk) 21:52, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! As for "Ṣuhḥ al-aishā": I assume it is the "wrong" book, then, and that there is no mix-up: that is; al-Qalqashandi-1919 source is different from the al-Qalqashandi-1903-source.

As for al-Zahiri; I don´t understand; that link gives me a page with Arabic. Perhaps if you tried the http-version (instead of https)?: this: p. 118 Huldra (talk) 22:15, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

@Huldra: Its not opening, I don't know why.. If you just want to confirm the page number then perhaps you can screenshot the page and send me a link. Btw, maybe "Ahmad al-Qalqashandi" and "Ahmad ibn al-Qalqashandi" are two different people. Makeandtoss (talk) 22:19, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Strange. I don´t know where you are, but in my experience many web-sites do not open in various places in the ME (don´t waste your time, clicking on all those Mfa.gov.il-links on Wikipedia, if you are in Egypt, say)

I´m pretty sure there is only one al-Qalqashandi..if he had a son, he didn´t publish, AFAIK. Look at the way the name is spelled *inside* those archive.org books: pretty much as the Wikipedia article. Ah well, I don´t think I will spend more time on this, thanks for your help, anyway! Huldra (talk) 22:30, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

@Huldra: I am in Jordan and I think its a localized issue (probably firewall/router stuff). This is the Arabic numerals for 118: ١١٨ . Glad to help in anything Makeandtoss (talk) 22:34, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Ok, wrong page then, I´ll study Arabic numerals and try to find the correct one!

One other question; could you tell me what the Arabic comment say on this picture? There is a picture of the same structure on commons here, I`m wondering if it should go into Daniyal, Huldra (talk)

@Huldra: The comment says "This is one of the surviving houses of the depopulated prophet Daniyal village". So yes, it should! Makeandtoss (talk) 22:55, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Excellent! Thanks! Huldra (talk) 22:57, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Peasants' revolt in Palestine into Siege of Al-Karak (1834). While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 19:43, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

@Diannaa: WP:NOATT: "If the re-user is the sole contributor of the text at the other page, attribution is not necessary" Makeandtoss (talk) 21:08, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

So sorry but you are mistaken. You did not add the content to the source article Peasants' revolt in Palestine; your only two edits are the ones that took place on June 10, 2016. The prose in question was added by another user on March 20, 2014. — Diannaa (talk) 21:18, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

@Diannaa: I assumed that the "other page" was the page to which content was transferred to, nvm. Makeandtoss (talk) 21:23, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

GID Jordan attacks

Hello, you undid an edit relating to the attack in Baqa'a stating that there have been many attacks on GID. This event is notable enough to be included on WP, and we can also add information about the other attacks if there are enough sources discussing them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flycatchr (talk • contribs) 20:32, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

@Flycatchr: Go ahead... Sorry for previous revert. --Makeandtoss (talk) 20:43, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

@Makeandtoss: Thank you :) --Flycatchr 20:54, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

I know

The stupid book says what you say it says, but it pains me that the quote we use is different from the text. PAINS ME. I understand why you're proud of the nabateans as a jordanian, they were a magnificent civilization. I hope to visit petra one day :)--Monochrome_Monitor 00:19, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

@Monochrome Monitor: Yeah, I was quite lazy last time to change it. I got things to do for the next 2 weeks, and then I will have some free time to completely read that "forsaken" book lol. Then I will have some free time to perhaps, prepare the Petra article to a good article. You can join me if you are interested. Anyway, as a Jordanian, I am proud of several things. My motivation to spend countless of hours on Wikipedia is driven by that pride and appreciation. This will be weird, but I have visited Petra so many times that I am starting to lose the deep sense of appreciation for its beauty. I hope taking a break from visiting will help me return to that state. :) Makeandtoss (talk) 00:31, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

That sounds fun! I'll read up. Maybe you could mix things up? Try visiting later in the day and catch the sunset.--Monochrome_Monitor 09:09, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Siege of Al-Karak (1834)

Hello! Your submission of Siege of Al-Karak (1834) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Borsoka (talk) 10:59, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Happy editing

I have lifted your topic ban from Mudar Zahran. I hope you will edit it in accordance with our guidelines and policies. Enjoy, Drmies (talk) 17:14, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

@Drmies: thank you ! --Makeandtoss (talk) 17:17, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

No need to thank me, Makeandtoss. Let's continue to improve our beautiful project. Drmies (talk) 17:26, 4 July 2016 (UTC)