Talk:Haim Arlosoroff

message: User Shuki is trying to insert an improper source - a book which has no recognizable authority according to wikipedia:RS "Academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources when available. However, some scholarly material may be outdated, superseded by more recent research, in competition with alternate theories, or controversial within the relevant field. Reliable non-academic sources may also be used, particularly material from reputable mainstream publications." In addition the issue of the version the defence suggested at the trial is already mentioned. Mashkin (talk) 23:17, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The book is no t a reliable source: it is by a publishing house that does not put out academic and scholarly books . The phrasing is terrible "According to testimony..." without saying who says what (is it Kotik?). What does this sentence mean "Their confession had been ignored by the Revisionist Zionist-hunting British police and the left-wing Jewish establishment, who were following their own political agenda to destroy the right-wing Zionist underground/political opposition to the left-wing Jewish establishment." are these your words, or Kotik's or someone else? The whole thing is redundant, given that this is the theory  that the Stavsky and Rosenblatt used in their defense and it is mentioned already. The topic of the Arlosoroff Assassination has so much reliable information written about it that using this fly by night book as a scholarly source is just ridiculous. Your behavior in keeping reinserting it is despicable and harmful to Wikipedia. Mashkin (talk) 09:02, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Mashkin, incredible how you can teach ethics on WP. Anyway, if you claim that the paragraph can be improved than be please do so. --Shuki (talk) 21:50, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no need for the paragraph, everything is already in he article: the theory of the Arab perpetrators, the fact that the issue was contentious and that it remains a mystery to this day. The paragraph was something like how not to write in Wikipedia. Mashkin (talk) 21:58, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Sorry, but you've yet to prove your writing skills for you to give advice to others. Your POV edit essentially cut down the paragraph that angered you to half a line, so there is no improvement here, only your arrogant opinion and consistant enforcement of it. And as for edit warring, ah, let's go to your talk page. --Shuki (talk) 22:15, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Attempt to use improper source

message: Arlosoroff's Hebrew writings are available in their entirety at Project Ben-Yehuda.  I'm not sure what the accepted form of including such a reference is, so I'm providing the info at this talk page, hoping someone could incorporate it into the article. Ijon (talk) 11:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: His Hebrew Works

message: Substituted at 16:58, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Haim Arlosoroff. 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/20120424101316/http://israelpublicart.com/public_art/?art=arlosoroff-memorial to http://israelpublicart.com/public_art/?art=arlosoroff-memorial
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) 11:43, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified