[WikiEN-l] Eliezer is not a suitable administrator

Fri Jan 27 16:05:20 UTC 2006

Again what is your user name?

Fred

On Jan 27, 2006, at 4:02 AM, david weiss wrote:

> sorry i accidently sent more than one message.  it wasn't clear to me
> that my first message got through.  now i know better how to use this
> tool (i think).
>
> in response to your e-mail, you gave one of six incidents i  
> observed this
> past week where Eliezer silenced a dissenting voice.  most of them
> involved different users.  let me focus upon my own problem with
> Eliezer.  he currently has me under a 24-hour block because he  
> claims i
> violated the 3rr rule (though the 3rr rule permits me to revert  
> vandalism
> by OpenInfo.  e.g. "he claims to be from the knesset" "opinion of ONE
> israeli", etc. instead of permitting me to entitle my own comments
> "reason for alert" and the like)  if i violated the 3rr rule, then  
> so did
> OpenInfo and the 3rr rule specifies Eliezer must apply the rule  
> fairly to
> all offending parties.  Eliezer deleted my tags, blocked me without
> warning and did not block OpenInfo.  what's the difference between
> OpenInfo and me?  OpenInfo shares Eliezer's anti-messianic agenda and
> admits on the talk page that he supports outreach judaism - an
> anti-messianic group.  i expressed the mainstream voice of judaism  
> that
> is pluralistic.
>
> on this same note, i tagged the alert and went to the talk page to
> explain the reason for my tag.  as i was typing part 2 of my reason,
> Eliezer blocked me.  my full explanation never saw the light of  
> day.  the
> partial explanation i managed to get onto the talk page was ignored by
> Eliezer and criticized by OpenInfo.  this certainly does not represent
> the voice of the community who watches this article.
>
> (please note: i never stated that i personally sibscribe to any of the
> above-mentioned views.  Eliezer and OpenInfo ASSUME i'm expressing  
> my own
> religious views.  while i have my own religious convictions this  
> forum is
> not the appropriate place since all of us are supposedly neutral.)
>
> finally, your question about the messianic jews executed during the
> spanish inquisions is a valid question (though i never got the  
> chance to
> address that issue either in the article or on the talk page.)  the
> inquisions exclusively tagerted jews who were in the church - i.e.  
> jews
> who confessed belief in Jesus.  while the majority of jews in spain at
> that time refused to join the church or confess belief in Jesus, the
> spaniards focused exclusively on jews within the church.  they  
> rounded up
> 1500, killed 500 who refused to renounce their jewish identity while
> believing in Jesus and released 1,000 under a death threat who  
> agreed to
> renounce their jewish identity while believing in Jesus (at least
> publicly).  did the term "messianic jew" exist at the time?  no.  by
> PROPER definition, were their religious beliefs and practices  
> consistant
> with messianic judaism or hebrew christianity?  they certainly weren't
> behaving like orthodox jews (though they could have).  if we apply a
> consistant and fair logic, then the article inaccurately asserts
> messianic judaism "began" in the 1860's and came from the church of
> england.  the term "messianic jew" didn't exist at that time, either.
> we'd have to say messianic judaism started in the 1970's when the
> movement adopted the name and was clearly in full swing for a long  
> time.
> if we more appropriately analyze the CHARACTERISTICS of messianic
> judaism, then we find this unique religious expression has existed  
> 2,000
> (which predates christianity by over 300 years).  we further discover
> messianic judaism has always existed over the past 2,000 years -  
> whether
> in large or small numbers.
>
> give unbiased third parties who have done over 10 years research into
> messianic judaism a voice in this article and i believe the end result
> will be an article that preserves the intrigrity of wikipedia and does
> not serve the radical agenda of Eliezer and OpenInfo.
>
>
>   Message: 7
>   Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 09:32:05 +0100
>   From: MacGyverMagic/Mgm
>   Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Eliezer is not a suitable administrator
>   To: English Wikipedia
>   Message-ID:
>
>   Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>   Sending one message to the list is quite enough.
>   If you are talking about reversions like
>   http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? 
> title=Messianic_Judaism&diff=36540336&oldid=36537686
>   then
>   Eliezer was quite right to make them. Articles are about facts, and
>   questioning the validity of any of them, should happen on the talk
>   page.
>
>   Where and when did you post those concerns on the talk page? Just
>   tagging is
>   not enough.
>   I've seen several people tag the article as totally disputed without
>   putting
>   any discussion on the talk page.
>
>   It would help a lot of you posted diff links to the edits you are
>   referring
>   to see WP:DIFF.
>
>   About the first editorial comment. If the article says Messianic
>   Judaism
>   started in the 1800s, then are you sure Judaism was actually called
>   Messianic in the 1490s? Jews may have died during Crusades or at the
>   hands
>   of Queen Isabelle, but they may simply be a completely different  
> form
>   of
>   Judaism altogether.
>
>   Mgm
>
>
>   On 1/26/06, david weiss wrote:
>
>>
>> eliezer imposes an unfair, seriously biased and inaccurate article
>> dealing with messianic judaism. when i had previously raised my
>>
>   concerns
>
>> in the discussion page and point out the gross misinformation in
>>
>   the main
>
>> article, eliezar would delete my tag. (as a side note, i observed
>>
>   others
>
>> tag this article as violating the npov policy only to have their
>>
>   tags
>
>> deleted without explanation.)
>>
>> i expressed my concerns on the talk page, only to be vandalised by
>> OpenInfo and blocked by Eliezer. Eliezer prevented me from
>>
>   explaining:
>
>> 1. where the npov policy was violated in several places; 2. show
>>
>   where
>
>> the facts were seriously inaccurate and, 3. show where the author
>> contradicted himself. eliezer blocked me without sufficient warning
>>
>   per
>
>> the blocking policy.
>>
>> while i strongly disagree with eliezer's anti-messianic agenda, i
>>
>   do not
>
>> feel i vandalized the article or site in any way. this site's
>>
>   policy
>
>> allows me the freedom to edit articles that violate the npov in a
>>
>   good
>
>> faith effort to make them more accurate.
>>
>> i believe eliezer will only force his anti-messianic agenda upon
>>
>   the
>
>> public and a new administrator needs to be appointed who will
>>
>   fairly
>
>> address the topic. thank you for your prompt and open-minded
>>
>   attention
>
>> to this matter.
>>
>
> -- 
> ___________________________________________________
> Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>