User talk:The Egyptian Liberal/Archive 1

could we get a countersource? becuase its important to mention initial reports THEN contradicted(Lihaas (talk) 15:28, 6 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

the article's going quiet. if the wikipedia article dies the revolutions dying..;)

but el abradei said tuesdays and fridays...so today should be bigger...

also, how were the alexandria protests yesterday? still active, slow, or none?(Lihaas (talk) 03:22, 8 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

[1] the page still has tags on it.

Also, do you have any word of overnight protests the last few days. thats been missing from the page.Lihaas (talk) 14:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

just read your message on my page, i was off for awhile. needed a wiki[edia break ;) The page should open up in 24 hours too, so wed be set for the melee.

Also, we really need to expand coverage of Alexandria. Are there any arabic sources that show how this is going? Al Jazeera is showing thousands there too. And what is the name of the train station that protests are centred aroud? (think they need their "tahrir square")

also 1 more question, will the protests stop after Mubarak leaves or will ti go till the party elaves (a la Tunisia)(Lihaas (talk) 14:56, 8 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Im not sure which is the main station talked about on the page, i believe i tagged it with a "which" can you confirm and add that.

im looking for some intl reactions now, but ill get to that

we can also restore the original 300-odd table od f casualties with the source now

so where do the "radicalised" MB youth go? EIJ?(Lihaas (talk) 15:27, 8 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

is that the younger faction that wanted to reach out to the copts?

also should we add that to the template?Lihaas (talk) 15:37, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

im just turning into an egyptian political pundit now ;)

the info on this party (i just added the NDP (and Tunisia former ruling party) to the arab world protests template.(Lihaas (talk) 20:08, 8 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Done. and you can add your upport/opposition. [2]Lihaas (talk) 11:56, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

same as above (or in this case "previously"). not sure if its a uk vs. usa english thing.

do you live in the uk or usa?Lihaas (talk) 13:51, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i read that (on al jazeera i believe). it makes sense, wont have mubarak's blackmailing hocus-pocus on negotiations, which were never fair. you can see what the Fatah have been up to in the Palestinian Papers. in that sense its a good thing for sure, now the islamicising bit...

as an aside, i hae a lot of links to go through for both the egypt and tunisia protests that i hope to do tonightLihaas (talk) 15:52, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

true, the reaction was muted because it came from the western bete noir. but at least its there for posterity for people to know (election time... (though everyone already knew it)

i was talking about hamas-fatah talks as the first step to talk with israel. agree that now israel cant afford to be complacent adn sit around hoping a mubarak thug can take care of the issue. (thats why netanyahous shitting bricks (although any word on what lierberman has said?))

btw- we hae consensus for the move to uprising on the talk -age.Lihaas (talk) 16:14, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

nothing at the moment, gonna take a break and then come back in some 2-3 hours.

but i was looking for an online source to "3 dead, hundresd wounded in last 2 days" (from al jazeera) + looking for boutros boutros ghalis statement.Lihaas (talk) 17:03, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i dont know how bnotable Farouk is for political tatements, but ia lso found an english like for ghali (interview with france 24), ill add it to the domestic page and then you acan add more if you feel more is necessary there.

btw- [3][4] (these were old when mubarak was strong). and now: [5] dummy!Lihaas (talk) 17:18, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

UpdatE: my comp. is going deadly slow andim damn exhausted so ill be heading off for now. be back tomorrow. I aded quite a bit today, will add more from the luinks i got later.Lihaas (talk) 23:34, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BREAKING NEWS: to step down tonioght,.,..BUT NOT ENOUGH IF SULEIMAN IS STILL THERE!

youre watching al jaeera too? ;)Lihaas (talk) 15:22, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Theres only so much ther yankee empire and the israelis can do...;)

but be afraid./..thsi needs to be like tunisia...the party needs to elave. el baradei in the itnerim the n...Lihaas (talk) 17:04, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

what are they saying? someone says soemthing then they respond "allah-o-akbar".

although, i dont see why arab christians cant use that phrase, its quite religiously neutral.(Lihaas (talk) 18:10, 10 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

WHAT THE GOD DAMN F***ING F***? ITS THE SAME FREAKING THING AS BEFORE!

im telling you man desperate times call for...bloody terrorist he is! at least Benb Ali cared a little more for tunisia more than this stooge.

i bet bottom dollar the likes of those terrorists in Riyadh are pressuring him (theyve already shot down the US (who have enemies all over egypt now)) to stay on! with all that oil money. the first terrorist to go has to be those peeps.(Lihaas (talk) 20:51, 10 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

suleimans a bigger idiot "dont listen to satellite channels, listen to your conscious" (somethign he does?)

theyve done more to embolden tomorrow than the organisers ever could! how can opeople keep trusting the f***ing army?

need an itl solidarity movement thats NOT the status quo. Iran or Latam!Lihaas (talk) 00:07, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

wo! watch it wiht the gandhi. hjes scum! western stooge (they love him there) Lihaas (talk) 00:18, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

if there is violence thats another game. i was just saying the intricacies of gandhi politics are not something to emulate ;)

economically right, socially centre-right (ie- Republican but NOT tea partyn right. In american my candidate would be ron paul. (sought an itnernship at the libertarian party in dc.)m ;)Lihaas (talk) 00:38, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

not exactly, thats more the typical republican constituents. see this (im on the BOTTOM right, youre thinking of the top rigt where pinochet would be)_. libertarians are quite varied (although abortion is the one issue im NOT on thi side with. for some reason its the "women in me" that supports womns rights ;))

btw-twitters gone mad, we need to mentions that(Lihaas (talk) 00:58, 11 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

also this is censorship. id support your readdition

Arrghh, you reverted everiything! ive corrected it now ;)(Lihaas (talk) 01:19, 11 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Youre a socialist? ive had some damn fun econ conversations with a socialist (though he was an economist and im not). though in terms of pragmatic politics i do lean there, just not personally. but then im a PURE free marketeer, not the american neoliberal "freemarket" hypocrisy.

there was an earlier section to add "analysis" but we said to wait out the event and then add it, where the split off pages would be better. see archive #2.

btw- expats in saudi support mubarak (surprise?)

also is there a real mosque by Tahrir, or is it a makeshift one for the protests? al jazeera just mentioned somethingo f the sort.(Lihaas (talk) 01:24, 11 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

alright im off. the excitement saw me through the day ;) ill add those links hopefully tomorrow.

damn! were both going at the same time! gonna be a hedache tomorrow ;)

we could quarantine the anaylsys passage pending talk?Lihaas (talk) 01:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now we need to dissolve the party ( a la Tunisia)

Also BBC or some channel was saying tht UAE and all offered to cover Egypts aid if the us stopped (offer to mubarak ofcourse, dictatrs love each other)

i should hope so. but what to happen to suleiman and the cronies? will they have any influence/power left?

i thinkw e should wait on revlution just yet (though uprising has long since had support). lets see the next few days

btw- areyou pn facebook?

damn ip's, im trying to lock it for some time [6]. I should hope the party's done, but can you cite it for change. b/c tunisia is still notlabeled revolution and thats a few weeks ahead (someprotests occurred in feb too)Lihaas (talk) 18:37, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i opposed in the interim (although roudnyl outnumbreD). id befair to move after a while, right now people are just watching "breaking news"

i understand the excitement (wish i was there), had a beer to toast the people' s revolution too, but the encyclopaeidc arguement cant take on sentiment to be npov/Lihaas (talk) 19:00, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i respect your view too in a heartbeat (as opposed to the ips and article raiders now (were gonna get well over 100k views today)). it maybe so, but right now only in rhetoric, physical changes are more accurate. right now were just in heated celebrations, if you mustLihaas (talk) 19:43, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

we seem to agree on all but the page move (healthy disagreement i might add ;).

im mopping up and addign to 10 feb and cleanig toady. see if todays cahnges are agreeabe to you.(Lihaas (talk) 21:36, 11 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

dude, nothing to worry about, MB will never win without repression. Will they win seats? yes. will they be ONE f the biggestr parties? yes. Will thehy form a govt. i tell you itsimpoossible. at MOST a national dialogue govt liek lebanon with a few cabinet seats. never be PM (i imagine PM will be bigger tan prez now).

at any rate, this article has been ravaged by animals now. ill return when its off ITN so we can clean it up.Lihaas (talk) 00:53, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

irst things first: to keep the revol. spriit: a munument to bouaizi (arab solidarity) and the alex. fellow..

btw- al jazeera ENGLISH is complete rot! its so rubbish with all these moronic english viewpoints. new-imperialists! its OUR revolution man! the people and the people alone!Lihaas (talk) 00:54, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

just made my last edit on te page. ill come back to clean up in a while. unless its over sunay (not gonna be over tmorrow for sure, its weeken) then we can work together ona cleanup, but we need the foreigners to leaeve the article. should i contact you for cleanup, or will you contact me so we work togheterm, with the odd ctual editor instead of ITN raiders?

i also left som e notes on the rbreking new swection. + el abradei calls for unity.Lihaas (talk) 01:12, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

al jazeera is suggesting the cronies and theri infreastructure is still around..(Lihaas (talk) 14:29, 12 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

qwikipedias killig my enthusiasm for the revlution...but ti seems algerias coming next...(that could be dangerously mroe "islamist")Lihaas (talk) 15:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

6pm and people still camped in tahrir, said theyd tay awhile.

some mad rabid animal of an admin has gone and moved the page to something noone agreed to. Once its off ITN i think we can calean it./ im working on cleaning the tunisia page, and expansing algeria. dont think anything going to change in iran, the revolutioary ferovour was all wrong. it was NOT widely supported except for the U-Tehran types which means the conservative heartland that didnt support them would not turn to change with them in charge.

Algeria ahs GIA and AQIM, so it can be won potentially more quick but it could also go the other way..Yemen is not really a threat DESPITE the Houthis, Southern secessions and Al Qaeda.(Lihaas (talk) 16:28, 12 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

what does "bin" mean in arabic? as in "osama bin laden" which id read as osama fof/from aden. (s. yemen where the family if from)

[7]"The revolutionaries of Egypt, and before them Tunisia, have exposed through deeds - not merely words - the leaders who are tyrants towards their own people, while humiliatingly subservient to foreign powers. They have shown the impotence of empty slogans that manipulate animosity towards Israel to justify a fake Arab unity, which in turn serves only to mask sustained oppression and the betrayal of Arab societies and the aspirations of the Palestinian people."

so nice to see for a change there is no arab infighting (a la lebanon (thered never be a revolution there b/c its the only loggnstaning democracy in the ME)). like the other african elections:" kenya, nigeria, ivory coast. How can they fight off the invaders if theyre divided?!? (god knows! indiall never have a revolution...although we can still hope on kashnmir. (btw- the majority dont cosider themselves part of either india or pakistan)

have you seen Mississippi Masala? theres a scene that says "africa is for africans" when the fellow is talking against Gujurati indians...he may be talkign against my people, but hes totally right. its those people FIRST.Lihaas (talk) 00:15, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

its all rubbish now, the "revolution" si not going to change much. the consolidation will occur and back to square 1 eventaully. doin th same foreigners' bidding.

like Les Miserables "empty chairs at empty tables" and "drink with me"Lihaas (talk) 15:11, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i dont know about "strongman" per se, one could make that arguement everywhere. But re-partition in Yemen is undoubtedly the best solution. Algeria's war started BECAUSE The army was not democratic. but in algeria there isnt religious diversity anyways, so the presence of islamist parties wouldlikely be similar to turkey instead of rabidly theological (which is interesting that israel doesnt want OTHERS to have extremist parties but shas and beitenau can be "freely" election and they claim to be the "only" democracy...) Syria i could see, but not next. its needs more changes across (memories of the crackdown are a little fresh, as in iraq). Nothing will happen in iran anytime soon, the opposition has no organisation (unlike in 79) and, as i said last time but no onelistened, dictatorship 101 means the presence of a revolutionary guard-like force which is not loyal to a state or individual but an ideology is hard to beat. itll be worse than iraq before any new government.

I have both indian and pakistani blood in me, its definately a gone case. like the british did in Ireland, Palestine (and to a lessr extent cyprus). its a little late now, the world is more religiously polarised (even though the Muslim Balochis are no friensd of Pakistan and see the Pathani Abdul_Ghaffar_Khan from what is not Pakistan and opposed to the muslim league (even before the latter had any electoral success punjab was run by a secular party of muslims (leadership and majority) with hindu and sikhs. Whatever it is the west is the big threat to fuck with us so they can divide and conquer, we need to stick together for Afro-Asia (and latam, to a lesser degree).

i actually commented on that some years ago "why is it called civil?"

btw- what does "bin" mean in arabic? im presuming it mean of/from as in Osama of/from Aden.Lihaas (talk) 18:38, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

does Laden somehow indicates hes from Aden?Lihaas (talk) 22:40, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

just saw al jazeera today, some inspirational stuff. some article about iraqi christians forced to go to the north kurdish parts. but they still considered themselves arabs first as opposed to some who see "solidarty" with western folk just b/c of religion. the guy said its all the americans fault that theyve been forced out, which is true. the perception of christian-christian solidarity is the only possible "negative" that opposes them. this was much better than the likes of Samir Gaegea who dont event consider themselves arab.

also that prayers in tharir when the christians protected the muslims and vice versa, it came to me in a dram some months.years ago (but of course in the indian context of an "uprising"Lihaas (talk) 00:01, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[8]Lihaas (talk) 19:21, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Im going to be busy till sunday, but i can paratake in discussion till then just not active editing. We really need to clean up ad source and add more then we can nominate it for GA. (ALTHOUGH SOME minor protests are still ongoing) stock excahnge has been postponed gain)Lihaas (talk) 19:20, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message. I was avoiding the big integration issue under the pressure of events, but have begun folding my work into the main Libya page. Please give me a couple of days to complete the process.

Praghmatic (talk) 03:13, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

me too ;)

dude, also te revolutions not a revolution yet. same ministers arein charge. they can consolidate in the months to the election. still dangeous. is Tahrir adn Egytp completely over with protests (wikipedia apart, i ask for real life)(Lihaas (talk) 02:06, 23 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

the rebolutions turning intop tunisia (ie- flopping..) whats going on there?

a;so what does "Jumu'a " mean? a facebook post said "Jumu'a mubarak (heart)"Lihaas (talk) 01:50, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I heard that but on a neocon source, whats your source?

good idea. pre-mubarak split and the post can be on the page itself. i havent looked at the page in a while, but it donnt imagine its too large. the cleaning should set the artilce for GA for now, when the whole thing's done then we can FA it. (tunisia is a goo d model age)

and when are elections?Lihaas (talk) 08:07, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, politicised military. blocking parties to guarantee el baradei/moussa wins. hardly DEMOCRATIC..Lihaas (talk) 06:24, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

im trying to appeal yuour block User_talk:SarekOfVulcan#User:The_Egyptian_Liberal by activists.Lihaas (talk) 06:29, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dont, it will end in 2morrow. Beside, I honestly need a break from wiki -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 06:32, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

okay ;)

but how come no ones called for dissolving those borders and uniting the arab nations? now thats a revolution..Lihaas (talk) 06:39, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

People in Saudi arabia dont like each other. there you got the Bedouin and the non-Bedouin; that's one country. You also have lebanon and iraq where Sectarianism is live and well. the pan-arabia movement was cute but not very realistic. people here need to understand nationalism first. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 07:34, 28 February 2011 (UTC) PS: I want to add lebanon to the middle east protests. they had a protest yesterday. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 07:34, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

we need to mntion somewhere all these notable roundabouts. Also any change of a pic of Sohar Globe Roundabout?Lihaas (talk) 12:15, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

tyes, yes, all pertinent (though alex. had the railway stations). also the non-egypt ones. make some edit as you know mote and id support/add to.Lihaas (talk) 13:56, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

oh yeah, forgot ;)

i have been on fb recently, with all the political peeps discussing this stuff ;)

ill do that (also remove your post from the page for anyumity)Lihaas (talk) 09:05, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NOW we haev a revolution?Lihaas (talk) 09:16, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, also, as much as it may not be liked by the liberal youth, but to be fair an open you must have MB representation. That would limit their growth. Remember repression fosters them ;)

Totally ready. and id support your proposals/Lihaas (talk) 11:25, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[9] Victory!Lihaas (talk) 06:24, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I dont foresee a MB takeover, theyre going to be limited now witrh an open society.

Ive been busy the last few days but ill get to that. Hariri's an idiot. the moronic protests will never get anywhere.

Just pisssed off by the terrorist regime that is saudi arabia!!!! need to be "wiped off the map!" pleased that iran at least commented, but they need to save the revolution there! (bahrain)Lihaas (talk) 02:21, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bloody GCC hypocritical terrorist scum. this after they condemn LIBYA for the crackdown! Why doesn't Iran come in and blast them away! Hezbollah and al-Sadr have already commented on solidarity. good show!

bloody hell, this is a harder show than egypt and tunisia even! Why doesnt al jazeera mention the qatari invasion of barhqain?Lihaas (talk) 10:21, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with both not having a right, just think that IF one is there they need to be countered.

I also Heard of the ongoing probs in Alrexandria. but its part of a revolution and lots of people are going to fight to fill the vaccum. Just hang in there and be vigilant.Lihaas (talk) 07:20, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

im just so exhausted today. ill get to it tomorrow or sat. long story.

Shias rre not turning it sectraian, Saudi is! amd it was pissing me off yest.Lihaas (talk) 08:15, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Egypt seems to have largeyl fizzled out of the media with libya bahrain and now JAPAN even. dangerous time, but Tunisia came back when we thought its over. so stary strong there!

shipping off the front lines tomorrow then? take care and be back ;)Lihaas (talk) 13:06, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whats the srtory with El Baradei? Best chance for a neutral/moderate prez, now?

Sherine Tadros' report says there quite a few peeps votign YES.Lihaas (talk) 19:47, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

nice ;)

So the outlook generally is looking up?Lihaas (talk) 01:31, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

oh oh! the MB are more leveraged than we though..Lihaas (talk) 07:04, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

proposed a blurb at itn, check it out.

also per this, with general precedence we user the events on the day itself as part of the same section. Although alternatively you could call the section "election" instead of results. weve done that too.Lihaas (talk) 13:12, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

nice informative graph, but whats the source on this [10]?

Also the map of how governorates voted needs to change "governors" to be consistent with the naming in the results at the bottom.Lihaas (talk) 13:17, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

there no source (or mention) of the process.Lihaas (talk) 14:07, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

cool, post on myu page or the talk page and ill get to it (latter my ight be better). been on for a while, im going off for now.Lihaas (talk) 14:31, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note, shouldn't the timeline articles be merged and summarized a little into a single article, rather than three separate articles (aside the main article of the revolution itself)?

P.S. Are the pictures of any use? --Sherif9282 (talk) 19:33, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...فعلا؟ ربنا يوفقكم بجد! أمن الدولة و شوية القيادات الزبالة الي في الشرطة مشكلة.. أنا متخيل قد إيه أنت مشغول، بس أنا محتاج أتكلم مع حد في المواضيع ده

If I can e-mail you?

And sure, I'll see what I can do to help. If I go for a complete overhaul of these articles, then I might work on them in a sandbox in my user page. BTW, featured articles don't need to be very long. At a 150K of length or less we can create a single, all-round article that is also a featured article. At least I hope so. --Sherif9282 (talk) 21:23, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Say, the Arabic version of the timeline article seems to be very good. I'll see what I can use from there. --Sherif9282 (talk) 21:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

.الي حصل في أمن الدولة ده من عمايل 6 أبريل؟ إنت قلت لي هتشوفوا هتعملوا إيه معاهم من هنا و حصل الي حصل! ده أحسن حاجة حصلت من ساعة التنحي! يا رب يعرفوا يجمعوا الورق الي إتفرم ده كله

I've been wanting to send you a message, and work a on the articles, but I've been busy with other stuff, and now university's back. So later ahead when I find some time! --Sherif9282 (talk) 00:34, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha! I wish! Instead, all the professors are commending us on what a good job we (shabab) have done.. they'll probably end up screwing us in the exams as always. Sigh...

On a side note, I was attending a lecture for Dr. Tharwat Badawy, the 70-something constitutional expert (heard of him?), and he was waving a copy of the constitution the Law Faculty had drafted! (BTW, أنا في حقوق انجليزي القاهرة) Not that we managed to get a look at it, or even know some details about it. Anyways, I really hope that constitutional referendum doesn't pass. !و الا مشكلة --Sherif9282 (talk) 00:23, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

في مظاهرات في الجامعة طول الوقت. عايزين يشيلوا رئيس الجامعة و عمداء الكلية و وكلاء الكليات و رؤساء الأقسام. مش عارف هيفضل مين في الجامعة بعد كدة. مفيش إتحادات طلبة عدلة، و مفيش محاولة حقيقية إن إحنا ننشئهم، لحد دلوقتي على الأقل... الي عايز يتظاهر يتظاهر و يطلب الي في دماغه.

It's become a state of mind, and it doesn't bode well. There's somewhat of a consensus though that these amendments need to be defeated. --Sherif9282 (talk) 12:34, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly don't know why we didn't think of something like that... Thanks for the idea, I'll try to see it through! And yeah, I heard many of them would come back and play their role in "rebuilding". Farouk el-Baz touched on that topic recently. Personally, I'm desperate to see such professors; those worth their title and place in university are few. The rest, ageing, ancient recording machines (أو دكاترة نص كم جايين كوسا) need to be disposed of; some ought to be strapped to their antique chairs and thrown from a bridge. And I'm sure you know what I mean! --Sherif9282 (talk) 14:24, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...إبقى شوف الفيس بوك بتاعك، بعتلك رسالة طويلة شوية على موضوع الدستور ده --Sherif9282 (talk) 14:26, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check this, this is serious! [11] [12] The bastards are still hard at work !والله مش طالبة فتنة طائفية

Haven't the army and government responded to their demands at Masbiro, namely rebuilding the church and punishing whoever's responsible? What else are they demanding? Why the violence at the Autostrad and Mokattam?

And those Salafis near Parliament... Retards! Haven't people had enough of this Amn Dawla-based Kamilia Shehata bullshit? Somebody shoot them and get it over with! FUCK!

I'm steaming and pissed off at the moment... إبقى شوف الفيس بوك، بعتلك رد، بيس؟ --Sherif9282 (talk) 20:40, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Egyptian liberal. My apologies for not replying to your talk page message last November - I'm afraid I only just noticed it was there and must have missed it with the other messages that were posted at the same time! Re Media:Egyptian parliamentary election of 2005 with logos.png, you asked about the similar file I had created for Iraq. I did this using the chart function within Open Office Spreadsheet - you can do similar with Excel if you're more familiar with that. Please let me know if you want me to help further - your one is looking good so far! AndrewRT(Talk) 23:37, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Egyptian Libearl! I created a wikipage about Ibrahim Elfiky but there is a wikiuser from Montreal who want to delete it. Can you give some help by visiting this page Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ibrahim_Elfiky and contributing to the discussion. If you know other Wikipedians , you can ask for their contributions too. Please contribute soon before the article is deleted. --Salah Almhamdi (talk) 10:21, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't understand this edit. Hope things are going well for you. Cheers, Ocaasi (talk) 13:32, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I think per WP:TALKO, it's better to combine comments into the same section rather than delete them. I'll restore it in a more logical place. Stay safe! Stay free! Ocaasi (talk) 15:48, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't want to bother you with this, but the image of his death has been removed again from the article, this time on Copyright grounds. We might have to prove that the family authorized release of the image to bloggers and the media, or even that the morgue released the photo legally. You can read the discussion is here if you are interested, but honestly, it might be faster to have Saeed's family write a letter to WP:OTRS using either Wikipedia:Contact_us/Photo_submission or Wikipedia:Contact_us/Permit releasing their rights to the photograph. I don't know if you have a way of getting in touch with them or someone who knows them, but whether or not the image remains in the article may partly depend on such a measure. Please let me know if you have any questions, and again, I hope you are doing well in Egypt. Ocaasi (talk) 14:18, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. SilverSeren has been helpful. I think we've actually settled the issue about where the photo came from, but now there are objections that a) since the morgue employee may have been bribed or that photo unauthorized that it was immoral or illegal for SAEED'S FAMILY to take the photo! Also, there are renewed objections about whether or not the image is necessary to illustrate what could be described with text, and whether it is being used in a shocking or exploitative fashion. I'm arguing against all of these points, so we'll see how it goes.

That is hard to hear about your friend. I really can't offer much insight from quiet America, but at least you can be happy that his death or anyone else's is the seed from which Egypt's free future will grow. It is very sad that they will not get to see it, but you know that in some way whatever comes next could not have happened without their sacrifice. Hopefully your anger will ensure that Egypt never again returns to a state like the one you had to endure for so long. Maybe it will even help other Egyptians to assist other Middle Eastern countries or people outside of the region. You've seen it up close, a part of history that has literally transformed the world. Those people who were killed, they are a part of that history too.

I don't think you're being an a-hole, and maybe it's ok to blow off that steam anyway. Hope you're doing ok. Ocaasi (talk) 22:15, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A quick update: I have found multiple sources that trace the image from Saeed's brother, who took the photo with his cell phone at the morgue, to Saeed's cousin. From there the image made it onto We are all Khaled Said (or ElShaheed). Do you know if Saeed's cousin was one of the administrators of the facebook page? Or how the photo got onto the internet specifically? If so, we would have a direct link from Saeed's brother to Wael. I will only contact him if necessary. Thanks for following up on this. Don't worry about the deletion discussions below, I'll take care of them. While discussion is ongoing over copyright the images it may or may not be deleted, but it won't end there.

My only recommendation about how to process something like what you went through is to stay busy and to take some time to yourself and spend time with other people and talk about what happened and try and get some normalcy and focus on the changes happening in Egypt and if you feel pissed, that's ok. I don't know if anyone has been through what you and your country is going through, but you're definitely not doing it by yourself. Cheers, Ocaasi (talk) 10:02, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What can you tell me about this website, its author, and the original source of the article/post: http://www.masrawy.com/ketabat/ArticlesDetails.aspx?AID=52899 ? Thanks again, Ocaasi (talk) 22:31, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's very helpful, thank you. Does 'attribution to Ayman Nour by stating "المصدر: تدوينات أيمن نور"' mean that Nour wrote it and Ahmed just republished it, or that Nour was one of the sources Ahmed used to write his own piece? This is likely a minor issue now, but it couldn't hurt in case objections are raised, and basically every objection that could has been. I think things are moving at the deletion discussion in the direction of keeping the image. You also might be interested in this page Talk:Death of Khaled Saeed/Sources. Not bad for English language coverage, although I'm sure Arabic ones do an even better job. Cheers, Ocaasi (talk) 02:50, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Huffington post is left-leaning but still considered a serious news and commentary site. Either way Masrawy sounds like a legitimate site, which is all that matters. The google translation of Ahmed's post said that it used Nour's blog as a source. If so, do you think you might be able to find me a link to that article at Nour's blog, maybe just by searching in Arabic for a sentence of two of the post? I think that is the very last thing I would ask from you for about this photo issue. Thanks again, Ocaasi (talk) 03:19, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Do you think you could find me a few major Egyptian (or regional) newspapers that published the photo? Arabic language is fine, so long as the publication is RS. Thanks... Ocaasi (talk) 19:00, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I found these, can you tell me about them, and if they are RS in Egypt, or like a news portal? If you can tell whether the author is a journalist or just a blogger, that would help, too.

• http://www.amcoptic.com/news/public-prosecutor-ordered-the-release-of-the-accused-and-elbaradei-campaign-calling-on-citizens-to-a/
• http://yamazaj.com/news/18945
• http://www.alroeya-news.net/miscellaneous-news/7059-2010-06-12-07-43-41.html
• http://arbnews.net/?p=1863
• http://arbnews.net/?p=1842

Thanks. Ocaasi (talk) 19:54, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good news, Saeed's image passed Non-free content review and is safe at the article. The page is developing nicely and there are lots of great RS. I have an interest in bringing the article up to higher status, if you want to help at some point. It took a lot of discussion, but I think people finally realized (most anyway) that this image was unique in its significance and warranting of inclusion. Thanks for your help. Ocaasi ^c 22:45, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Khalid-Saeed.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. USchick (talk) 23:49, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Khalid-Saeed.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. USchick (talk) 23:53, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ive cleaned and added some more. Check it out and see if you think something else needs to be added (the demographics are a bit dodgy so i just link to that page). Also need a source to link this to the MENA protests.Lihaas (talk) 11:15, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done the ref.Lihaas (talk) 08:12, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

مش فاهم، عايزنى أعمل صورة جديدة بالترجمة الإنجليزي ولا مجرد أترجم الكلام في الصورة؟ --Sherif9282 (talk) 16:29, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Translating is a piece of cake, but I suck at this kinda stuff; I can barely use Paint. Do you know the program used for this? That might help... --Sherif9282 (talk) 19:08, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Beace! I'm working on it. I'll have the translation on Word... Uhh, how do I send it to you? --Sherif9282 (talk) 20:03, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ta-da!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2011_Egyptian_Constitutional_Referendum_process_in_English.svg

Please leave a note here or at ynhockey's talk page, he's the one who did it.

Let me know if there's anything else. Ocaasi (talk) 16:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Just a note: While you can always let me know of an ongoing discussion, try not to ask explicitly for anyone's support while notifying them. Per WP:CANVASS, this can cause problems. Instead, just note that the discussion is happening, or ask for someone to add their opinion. Ideally, ask more than one person who don't necessarily agree with you. Small policy thing, and not a problem for people who present arguments with their views, but it could end up causing confusion or suspicion, which would be counter-productive. Congrats --kinda-- on the referendum. Sorry your view didn't prevail, but at least you know you'll be very busy the next 6 months! Ocaasi (talk) 13:58, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Egyptian Liberal! I actually consciously avoided doing those two things, for neutral point of view reasons. I am far from an expert on the subject, but at first glance, the potential risks seem a matter of opinion. If there are sources that discuss them, they should be presented in the actual article—images can't have sources so they should be as neutral as possible. As for the coloring scheme, the Arabic version brought very strong connotations; I actually used the exact same colors, making them less bold. I have no problem with changing the color scheme, but have strong reservations about the one used in the Arabic version. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 12:33, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree EL, that it's important for the image to agree with all sides or sources and not present on POV, unless of course it is marked clearly as such. Then we would probably need an RS to show to whose POV it is. Ocaasi (talk) 13:19, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In reply to your latest comment: regarding the coloring scheme, my version also uses red and green, it's just not #f00 and #0f0, respectively. In any case, I would prefer it if you took up the discussion about possible reservations to WP:EGYPT and the talk pages of major relevant articles to get more input. By the way, because my version is SVG, anyone with InkScape or one of the major commercial apps (Adobe Illustrator or CorelDRAW) can change the text easily to any other language if they need. In fact, I might make a Hebrew version if there is demand. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 15:25, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you see that the result breakdown by governorate should be a bit more detailed, given the fact that all governorates approved the amendments? If yes, could you help me with that key problem? Cheers, A elalaily (talk) 10:57, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

on this editor who would rather fight than talk Talk:2011_Yemeni_protests#Refs.

1. He muched up the outline of the page which weve been working on on all articles. [13] can you comment on that?
2. and now [14] which restores red links (which i explained in my edit summaries) without discussion. it also replicateds refs which he claims "we dont do it this way" when there is precedence for it. not to mentions censors the first resignations.
3. also these muchabouts need correcting [15][16]

thanks.Lihaas (talk) 19:35, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

After reading your other 'discussions' you're both being reported. Wikiepdia is NOT a propaganda machine for your own private agendas. Flatterworld (talk) 15:04, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, me and Lihaas have no private agendas. I am a Leftist Liberal Irreligious male and she is Right-wing Libertarian Christian female. We diff one many issues on wikipedia and in the real world as well. We just respect one another POV and we try to improve wikipedia in a non-biased way. Sometimes she will ask me "to pack her up" but I dont because I disagree with her and she does the same exact thing. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 05:43, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Flatterworld, these two have been beyond dedicated in keeping the MENA protest articles well-sourced, thorough, consistent, and readable. Please cut them a break for speaking in such a way that appeared to be colluding against you; they are really just colluding to keep the articles in good shape. Lihaas, I mentioned to EgyLib that it is against WP:CANVASS to directly ask editors to support your opinion. I know you disagree with eachother at times, and have with me, but still, try to just notify issues neutrally, with a link to the discussion, and don't insinuate that others will agree and then just back you up. Cheers, Ocaasi ^c 15:31, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is that why your editor note said "be more careful"? iow, don't leave tracks? Flatterworld (talk) 16:16, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If that was the case, I would have deleted her comment after I read it and removed every thing she wrote on my page. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 05:43, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No. It just looks bad. It's good for editors to work together. They can also have differences about how to write an article. Let the issue settle a bit before jumping to conclusions, please. It's totally reasonable that you disagree with them about an editorial choice; I don't think there's a conspiracy against you, just a team effort to make the article as good as the other MENA articles they've been working on for months now. I've asked them to be careful about Canvassing, and to keep substantive discussion at the articles. Aside from that, there's just a content dispute. Ocaasi ^c 22:50, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I need help with translating arabic and I saw you speak Arabic. Can you tell me what the crown prince of libya is saying in this video [17] and what the reporter is saying in this video, [18]? I don't speak Arabic so I'm asking you. Spongie555 (talk) 23:48, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive me if I misunderstand your intent, but I think you meant to say we are not going to split anything, and that it's "too" early. I agree with that position, but even if I didn't, I wanted to make sure you stated your position clearly. Abrazame (talk) 05:14, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, no problem.

I did write about that at the page yesterday and I've done so again today. I was surprised to see after your statements yesterday in strong support of not splitting the timeline that today you're very strongly supporting the opposite position, to move the timeline off the article...? Abrazame (talk) 06:47, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

مرحبًا، اليوم جمعة الرحيل والحیقيقة

I think that if the situation will not calm this evening, the serious war can occure, much bloody. And this Friday must make clear the time in which we all living. What do you think about it?62.220.33.64 (talk) 11:30, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My friend, I understand your instinct to give the topic of police brutality a personal image to bring home on a human level how harrowingly despicable it is that they would use their power not just to kill, but to so disfigure a human being. The thing is, that people who have not been desensitized to such images will not be able to bring themselves to read the article in the first place after seeing an image like that. I think it does not serve the article to subject general readers to such a graphic image without warning. "Wikipedia is not censored" does not mean "anything goes" or "any image related to the subject is appropriate", it means that if a photo is central to understanding the subject, or strong language is notably relevant to the topic, we are not going to be prudish about publishing it.

It may be reasonable to show in the article about Khaled Mohamed Saeed — or, I would argue, it may be reasonable to show only to readers who choose to click on it, because again, you're limiting the number of sensitive people who could bear to stay at the page and learn about the subject, while you're increasing the number of insensitive people who think it's cool to look at such a thing. Of course it is relevant to the protests article that Khaled Mohamed Saeed became a rallying point against police brutality, much like it's relevant that the Alexandria bombings spurred clashes with police there and in Cairo only a couple weeks earlier. But, for example, we don't need to see a close-up image of someone killed in a suicide bombing to bring home to a reader how horrible that is.

On another note, I saw your request for more editors at the page, but I regret to say that I will not be able to edit much in the next three or four days. I hope your request encourages more editorial involvement there, and I will do what I can both in the article and at the talk page when I return. Best wishes, Abrazame (talk) 12:03, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Egyptian, I think it might be better to take it easy on the editing while emotions are running so high. Nothing you do on this article can change things on the ground, unfortunately, and either way the situation will be tense until it resolves. Maybe stick to more copy-edit type changes, or just take a break and read it from afar. Or even try something different entirely, like a little walk... put some of the craziness in perspective, or at least give yourself a moment to catch your breath. Let me know if you want to email or chat. Ocaasi (talk) 00:29, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I like what you have done with the background; it is now more to the point. But to be honest with you, I do not see "Alexandria church bombing" as a critical point of the protests to have its own section in the page (Notice the comparably limited media coverage compared to Military position or foreign relations for example). I think a summarized version of it (that off course includes the accusation of Interior minster) would be better placed in the "Domestic responses" where it talks about religious institutions. What do you think? About the "Analysis" Section, I'm glad that you started that section as I have a feeling that the military would have a vital role in the coming events. --Osa osa 5 (talk) 04:41, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't understand this section-split. I responded in the Background section on the talk page. Ocaasi (talk) 05:07, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I work mainly here in Wikipedia; the Wikimedia account I only use to upload pictures. Basically I'll be replying over here rather than on Wikimedia.

I do have more pictures, a variety of them, mainly in Tahrir Square and recently a few at the Parliament. I will be uploading more soon. If you have suggestions or ideas on the, let's say, theme or subject of pictures we could use, do let me know. I'll be uploading more anyway as soon as I'm free. Eshta! --Sherif9282 (talk) 14:32, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

P.S., there was an image I added of a tear gas grenade [19], and it's not there anymore. Any idea why it was removed? I suspect sensitivities over my caption saying the grenade was American-made.. maybe? --Sherif9282 (talk) 14:36, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for the clarification. And I'll see what I've got on regarding women's participation. !ويسقط حسني مبارك ويسقط النظام! تغيير.. حرية.. عدالة اجتماعية --Sherif9282 (talk) 15:46, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

!أنا كنت برة فعلا :) الواحد ماكنش هايفوت اللي بيحصل في الشارع. عاشت مصر حرة I've been considering posting on Flickr. I have little experience of it though, but I certainly plan to make that account. I'll work on getting those pictures up. The next 24 hours will be very hectic for me though, but you can expect something to be up by Sunday. --Sherif9282 (talk) 02:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ma3lesh... kolena leena door, wl enta 3amalto ta2seero momken ykoon akbar mn el enta mota5ayelo.

Pictures.. I'm getting them ready aho! I had fun on Friday, Saturday was for cleaning up. :) Ba2olak eh, kont bafakar f 7aga zy 'montage' aw 'collage' sowar, zy de [20], w tgeeb kol mara7el el sawra w keda. --Sherif9282 (talk) 15:33, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ezzayak!

I've been uploading some gradually, until I finally put a big batch the last couple of hours. Right here. I've put up a variety of pictures, and you'll find quite a few that'll help concerning the contributions of women during the protests. --Sherif9282 (talk) 22:42, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...عمر سليمان هو رجل مبارك وواصِله

Maybe I mistake, but anyway

قل من فضلك فكرتك 62.220.33.64 (talk) 18:44, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi The Egyptian Liberal, I was busy the past few days so I was not able to follow the page that closely. Any way, I was surprised to see the layout of it being changed back to the way it was before (I am specifically talking about the background). I went to the talk page and there was not a discussion about it except by Ocaasi (unless if I missed something). I am really not sure what is the good reason that he/she found to change the layout that was agreed upon by three editors. What is Military and Foreign relations doing in the "Background"; they belong to an aftermath section. Moreover, what is that "Lead-up to the protests" section for? Is it leading events to protests? NO. So what is the purpose of having events that happened recently grouped together? But not all of them are "events"! Is it not the "National Police Day protests" part of the revolution? Online activism is not an event it is more of a tool to the revolution (a good point in an analysis section if there would be one). "Alexandria church bombing"; I fail to see the point of having it in the page from the first place. It did not cause the protest it does not have an effect on the way the revolution went, and it does not have an effect on the aftermath of the event. So where does this go if it "must and absolutely" be included? Well, the domestic response where religious Institutions are discussed is a good place. In conclusion, "Background" became long again for no reason and "lead-up" section is a random list of no help. I would like to know your opinion on how things look now.--Osa osa 5 (talk) 07:17, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The main problem with your changes was that they moved several subjects into an entirely new and misplaced area. I understand that the Church Bombing may be out of balance where it is now, but let's only deal with that section and leave the rest of the layout in its i-think-quite-natural format.

Also, just because something is mentioned in the Lead-up section, still doesn't mean it was a "cause". Obviously, it makes an insinuation to have it there, that it was at least related, but we have some room to describe important happenings that were just part of the milieu at the time. How to handle that best is something we can figure out. But while we do, can you tell me what the big concern is about the current set-up? Is it so bad or inaccurate that people might think that bombing was part of the lead-up to the protests?

There's more discussion in the Background section on talk. A constructive idea has been to describe Christian-Muslim relations more generally rather than singling out that bombing, which you have suggested was only coincidentally related to the protests. That's okay with me. I think there's a reasonable counter-argument, that the bombing both raised tensions and made many moderate Muslims realize that it was time to cooperate, but that's a matter for sources to confirm or deny. Ocaasi (talk) 13:26, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

could you help on this editorlising? Talk:2011_Libyan_protests#Why_are_people_adding_more_bullets_to_the_timeline_of_events.3F they just admitted to "headlining " which is an attempt at pov.Lihaas (talk) 11:27, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just to let you know that your merging of two AfD discussions has been raised on the ANI noticeboard. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:51, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

3 AfDs, actually. I've blocked you for 48 hours to prevent further disruption until we figure out what the heck happened and fix it. Once that's done, any passing admin can go ahead and unblock. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:28, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am bewildered as to what your intentions were here. Moving comments from one AfD to another means that you make it look as though an editor is commenting on the deletion nomination of one article when in fact they were commenting on another, which gives a completely misleading impression to anyone reading it. It also removes material from discussion on the other article, which makes it impossible for a proper assessment of consensus on that one from taking place. I am also unable to find anywhere where you have made any attempt to explain your actions. Can you please do so here? If so that will help us to understand what you were attempting to do and why. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:02, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I explained to you why I merged the articles. Now, I am going to explain to you the AfDs. The 3 AfDs were dissucing the topic (Should we an article about 2010-2010 protests that is happening in different countries beside the middle east and if so what should it called). After I merged the article, I wanted every point mention in the 3 AfDs to be heard so I made the mistake by merging them together in AfD of the article that I thought had the most NPOV name. I am again very sorry and I am not here to appeal my block. It was right choice. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 12:21, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, please note that an AfD notice on an article includes the words "the article must not be blanked, and this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed." By replacing an article by a redirect you have both blanked it and removed the AfD notice. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:08, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have noted that NOW and I am again very sorry and I am not here to appeal my block. It was right choice. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 12:21, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to appeal. It is quite clear from what you say that you understand your mistake and won't repeat it, so I have unblocked you. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:27, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good choice to unblock and I'm pleased to see that this is all sorted out. Good luck with getting back to editing, TEL. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:42, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edit, i was not sure where to place the protests-section, i was hoping for some comments on the location here, but I trust your decision, thanks for your assistance. --Smart30 (talk) 13:30, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Read WP:NPOV. You may think that the 2011 Egyptian revolution was non-violent, but the article - well sourced- proves otherwise; there were deaths, and Cairo is described as a "war zone". That may be non-violent to YOU, but it is not objectively so. If you persist, I'll have an administrator review your edits. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Carlos, I think it's a bit premature to invoke POV here. There's a reasonable disagreement about what non-violent revolution means, and we should discuss it on the talk page of the article. I'll briefly state that non-violence in a revolutionary context almost always refers to the protesters, not the regime they displace. In Egypt, the vast, vast majority of protesters were non-violent. That they were occasionally fired on or harassed does not mean they used those tactics themselves, and certainly not primarily. A Category is broad enough that it can encompass events that match up well, but not 100%. Is a peaceful revolution in which one person throws a rock violent? What about a country of millions where a few hundred are killed after protesters are attacked by the police or regime loyalists in an otherwise non-violent uprising? Matters of interpretation and degree are at work here, not just POV pushing.

Egyptian, because of your known stance on the issues, it may be better to refer those reverts to the talk page, so that others with less of a potential COI can add them. I don't think that's required, but that, in addition to slightly more explanatory edit summaries, could help avoid those accusations. Ocaasi ^c 17:37, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fancy helping out here-2011 Libyan civil war? Wipsenade (talk) 09:43, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What happened? [21]. Is it safe to say that in Egypt? I heard it was illegal to change religions. Pass a Method talk 00:18, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How did your family react to your decision? Pass a Method talk 00:31, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you erase the digital signature without permission?
Ahmad E Shahin (talk) 02:37, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, sir.
Ahmad E Shahin (talk) 10:05, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

can we get the Arabic name translations for the lead of Gebran Bassil and Jean Kahwaji. btw- ill get to your request soon too, i was just finishing up the Finlsand electiona rticle for GA and im about to sleep.(Lihaas (talk) 21:51, 8 June 2011 (UTC)).[reply]