User talk:Jimr18

Welcome!

Hello, Jimr18, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

Beit Hakerem

Dear jimr18,

Your contribution to the Beit Hakerem article read a bit like an advertisement. Please keep a Neutral Point Of View.

Thanks, Samfreed 23:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Samfreed,

With all due respect, how can an addition to a posting that describes the current demographics, describes the new outdoor mall that has become a wonderful meeting place for the residents and comments about the abundant greenery as well as the beautiful synagogue be more balanced? Should I have left out the item that talks about the noisy buses being replaced by the quiet pollution free Jerusalem Light Rail? These were factual statements.

Perhaps you have a political agenda that leads you to look for the things that are negative in 'certain areas'.

jimr18

Hi, good to get a conversation going. No agenda, I just believe there are a few honest misunderstandings here, most probably arising from lack of experience in the wikipedia. For example:

- Beit Hakerem
- "New and very vibrant" is not encyclopedic style, too promotional in my taste, at least.

Jimr19 interject: It may not be your subjective taste, but for me is is an accurate factual description. I would not add the 'dead' second floor of Kikar Denia. I think your censorship of my writing is not very tolerant and is in fact dictitorial.

Also there is hardly a need to specify every category of shop, the mix is pretty typical. Most redundant for me is the "coffee shop" separate from "eateries".

- Is the bookshop best described as "English"? I seem to recall books in many languages.
Bayit Vegan
- When you changed the category from "Orthodox Jewish communities in Jerusalem" to "Ultra Orthodox Haredi Jewish communities in Jerusalem" you actually moved it away from the former category, and created a new, empty category. I doubt that was your intention. Look at WP:CG.

Jimr19 interject: My intention (which you assumed) was to be accurate in description and as you should know...Charedi i s very different from Modern Orothodox Religious Zionist..

- Also, adding every possible useful piece of information (bus routes etc.) is not the sort of content that an encyclopedia aims for. See WP:NOT#IINFO.
- Adding the gripe about future bus routes is also out of place. see WP:NOT#SOAPBOX.

As I mentioned above, your contributions are most welcome, and as I have been instructed in my time by others, so I just wanted to point out to you these points.

I guess you live in the vicinity. I live in "old" Beit Hakerem. I will be happy to help with any questions.

--- Samfreed 14:22, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All you are asked to do is to follow Wikipedia policy WP:POLICY, and use your considerable positive energy in line with general norms:

In answering points on a talk page, such as this, it is considered correct to add at the end of the discussion, and sign your comments, so it is clear who said what.
The article on Beit Hakerem is hardly the place to point out distinctions within Jewish orthodoxy.
We are building an encyclopedia, not a free-for-all wiki.
Please read the guidelines as referenced above.

If you would like to discuss by phone, ring me on 02 652 5072. 18:07, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

The comments about the distinct group(s) within Orthodoxy is informational and truthful. If I follow your logic, why point out which branch of Judaism is represented? Why say Orthodox or Reform or secular..just Jewish is o.k.? Those are distinctions as well. You seem to be the dictitorial writing police. Not very liberal in action just in concept. Who made you the censor of truth? If what I wrote was untrue...fine. You do not question its truth just dictate what information is o.k. and what YOU decide is o.k. to write. We are not questioning truths..just your need to CONTROL what is written. That is a very strange position for a person who is tolerant of everyone, but obviously tolerant of nobody else, in reality. That is hypocritical. And over what? A comment whose truthfullness you do NOT question. But you, the censor policeman rules with an iron fist and dictitorial certainty! Sad comment about your abuse of power here! How far do you demand that we take the generalized description? Perhaps humans live in the area would be a better generalization.

Jimr

Sir, Sir.... No one is disputing the TRUTH of what you say, only it's relevance to an article about Beit Hakerem, We agree that there are some Orthodox Jews living in Beit hakerem, but according to your edits, you want to specify that they are Modern Orthodox, and then you equate that with Religious-zionist. Now, we both know that that is 85% correct, but there are other stories in Modern Orthodoxy, and traditionalist sepharadis, but all that is not specifically relevant to Beit Hakarem as such. So, the correct way to do this on the wikipedia would be to write that there are "orthodox" or "modern orthdox" living in Beit Hakarem, which is both True and Relevant to the subject of the article, and to make the word "orthodox" a link to an aticle that discusses these current in contempoarry society.

I cannot beg you enough: Please read the Wikipedia policies before editing so viciforously, it only leads to confrontation, where you are absolutely correct in that your information is true, and I am corect in that it does not pertain to the article.

BTW, when you read more about the wikipedia, you will find out that there are many dispute-settling mechnisms, if you feel you are being wronged.

Again, Please add your comments at the end, and sign with four tildes, like so ~~~~, this will expand to a dated & timed signature, so we have also the date and time of your comment. Samfreed 22:36, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beit Shemesh

Hi, thanks for editing the article on Beit Shemesh. I have reverted your edits due to not following WP:NPOV and being poorly written in general. Also please understand that when adding controversial statements as you did, it is generally necessary to accompany them with reliable citations so that your statements are interpreted as fact as not as an attempt to bad-mouth a certain sect. Cheers, Ynhockey ^(Talk) 23:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]