Content deleted Content added
Line 447: You LIe again, I said name a work where it says " Michael was converso cause of the connexion with the zaporta family", Baron denies it, cause he does not know that beatriz zaporta was zaporta, So you are lying. Name a work that says that before 1999. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Anatoly Ilych Belousov|Anatoly Ilych Belousov]] ([[User talk:Anatoly Ilych Belousov|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Anatoly Ilych Belousov|contribs]]) 18:42, 21 August 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> Amazing, Baron denies all the converso origin in all his works, what are you talking about? In that same work you are referrin Boarn says Michael is not Converso. cause.. he does not realize who Gabriel Zaporta is, do you knwo who he was? gonzalez, in 1999. he is the first who writes " Michael is converso cause of the zaporta conexion" None of your MSI published anythig before 1999, even more, it was so known that everyone wrote the contrary, Baron, Alcala, Hillar, so stop lying now. I have access to the whole works, so I know what they say and what they do not.Name a work, in which it says so. It was so evident nobody said it before, and wrote the contrary for decades, wow your statements are great, None said it before, what i said, and they even wrote the contrary. It was known?? hillarious. we can ask Bernstein, and his study on the Shaprut/ Zaporta families, on the Hebrew University, or what the University of Jewish studies says, or what the Jewish magazine of Culture says, or what Aki Yerusalahim says.--[[User:Anatoly Ilych Belousov|Anatoly Ilych Belousov]] ([[User talk:Anatoly Ilych Belousov|talk]]) 18:50, 21 August 2012 (UTC) == Dispute resolution on New Works section == | |||