Dan Keshet writes:
Please don't personalize the issue as if Zero were the only one who disagrees with your text. It is wrong on many accounts, accounts which I have described on the talk page.
Huh? I haven't seen any errors noted by you in the article text. All I have seen is your personal support for Israel Shahak's claims about the Jews. (i.e. you haven't disputed the views of anyone mentioned.)
You repeatedly claim that YOUR OWN READING of Jewish texts leads you to conclude that Israel Shahak attacks on Jews are correct, and that people who disagree with him are in error. But that is YOUR OPINION. This article is not about your opinion, it is not about Zero's opinion, nor is about my opinion. (Nor, for that matter, are you qualified to be an expert on interpreting 2,000 years of rabbinic literature.)
We are obligated to follow NPOV policy, which states that we phrase things like this: Israel Shahak claims X, other groups disagree claiming Y. You and Zero, however, keep insisting that Shahak is correct, and you are not allowing the article to fully mention Shahak's views, nor are you allowing the views of other people to be cited. That behaviour is a serious violation of Wikipedia NPOV policy.
Both you and Zero have failed to identify a single error in the text that you keep deleting. Rather, both of you merely claim that IN YOUR OWN VIEW it is wrong for people to disagree with Shahak.
You and Zero need to re-read our NPOV article. If we write an article on "Dan Keshet", in that article we can mention your views on Shahak and on the Jews. If we write an article on "Zero000", in that article we can mention Zero's views on Shahak and on the Jews. But none of your personal views on this issue should be included in the article on Israel Shahak.
I have repeatedly indicated my willingness to use mediation to try to improve the discussion, in an attempt to lead to a better article. Zero was hesitant, but said he would try it. Will you join us?
Zero has stated that I am a lunatic who should be banned, and he uses non-stop reversions to censor every fact that he doesn't want people to learn about. He refuses to allow any contributor to use NPOV terminology to mention people who disagree with Shahak. This is harassment. Zero is acting in bad faith, and needs to learn that our articles include info *whether or not we feel comfortable* with such info.
Robert (RK)
===== "No one is poor except he who lacks knowledge....A person who has knowledge has everything. A person who lacks knowledge, what has he? Once a person acquires knowledge, what does he lack? [Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim, 41a]
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
RK, I disagree with your summary of my comments on the talk page, but this is not the appropriate place to discuss them.
I have repeatedly indicated my willingness to use mediation to try to improve the discussion, in an attempt to lead to a better article. Zero was hesitant, but said he would try it. Will you join us?
Zero has stated that I am a lunatic who should be banned, and he uses non-stop reversions to censor every fact that he doesn't want people to learn about. He refuses to allow any contributor to use NPOV terminology to mention people who disagree with Shahak. This is harassment. Zero is acting in bad faith, and needs to learn that our articles include info *whether or not we feel comfortable* with such info.
You didn't answer my question. Do you want to try mediation or not?
--dk