Talk:Esam Omeish

message: fwiw: I concur with the IP's removal of the photo and the "personally hired" segment. The references for that section didn't reflect what we were asserting.  The newspaper link was dead & the Google books link only indicates that the names of both individuals are in the book. (from what I can see - on a list in the book.. ). Even if we could back up the text, a photo of that size on an article of this size about a totally different person seems to lean toward WP:UNDUE. --Versageek 20:16, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added supporting refs from the Washington Post and Paul Sperry.  I'll wait on the photo -- but that is the "thumb" size, which is generally recommended.  I've also now added a quote from the subject as reported in the Washington Post about al-Awlaki.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:07, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  photo & "hired" segment 

message: Calling my brother a "terrorist" is libelous and furthermore has nothing to do with this subject. Secondly to find quotes of political opponents in the Washington Post - as if this is the opinion of the WP itself - is disingenuous. The quotes are nonetheless an inaccurate reflection of me and who I am. I will continue to fight to clear my name even if I must take this further EsamOmeish (talk) 04:41, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: *I'm still concerned about WP:UNDUE here.. for a biography of an individual, we are giving an awful lot of space to those who opine that he has ties to radical Islam and terrorism. It certainly needs to be mentioned given that so many reliable sources report it - but should close to half our article be about it? --Versageek 02:12, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That policy requires that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each.  It does not require that references be equally divided between positive and negative references, or that the candidate be presented in a light skewed in a manner that is more positive than that of the RSs.  Without question IMHO, this presents the subject in no worse a light than that reflected in the prominence of the positive and negative treatments of him in RSs.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:36, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW, one thing I find especially odd -- the IP address that indicates it is the subject of this article, and which has been the most vociferous voice arguing "libel" here, itself was the source of what is considered per se libel editing (if untrue) at this unsourced edit, when it inserted a statement in that article that the subject of that article (Abu Usamah) left a mosque "under a cloud of allegations of sexual misconduct".--Epeefleche (talk) 02:27, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "Known for"; deletions of material called libel/slander

message: What Paul Sperry says below is wrong. HE HAS CONSISTENTLY DELETED ANYTHING POSITIVE added to this article because he had an agenda. All of the positive information including the winning of awards, being a 9/11 first medical responder is 100% accurate. He has an agenda and only wants to add all the negative information and throws a fit if anything at all positive is added by calling it "vandalism". The insidious language he uses is a violation of terms.
The language and quotes from the articles deleted by Sperry DO APPEAR and were in fact cut and paste DIRECTLY from the article, yet he deleted the properly referenced material anyway because it did not fit his agenda. This information should remain and Paul Sperry should be blocked from editing this page  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.179.93.254 (talk) 12:05, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: BS Epeefleche. I'm not tag-teaming with anyone. I'm no one's meatpuppet or sockpuppet. Don't threaten me with 3RR violations when I've made one revert to this article (and you've made more than dozen). Its uncalled for. Tiamuttalk 13:18, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

text: And by the way, your reflexive revert deleted the ref formatting I did, even for refs you retained, . Tiamuttalk 12:12, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Reliable sources

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Esam Omeish. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100108085244/http://www.hhr.virginia.gov/Initiatives/ImmigrationCommission/9-25-07_meetingMinutes.pdf to http://www.hhr.virginia.gov/initiatives/immigrationcommission/9-25-07_meetingMinutes.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120929121416/http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2009/elections/va/delegate/1319/esam-s-omeish/ to http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2009/elections/va/delegate/1319/esam-s-omeish/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:13, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Esam Omeish. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100122235620/http://www.daralhijrah.net/mosque/aboutus/Board%20of%20directors to http://www.daralhijrah.net/mosque/aboutus/Board%20of%20directors
*Added archive https://archive.is/20070804120210/http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0907/459034.html to http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0907/459034.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:14, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified