Misplaced Pages

User talk:Debresser: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:08, 7 March 2016 editNishidani (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users99,541 edits Just to be clear← Previous edit Latest revision as of 00:20, 19 November 2024 edit undoMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,138,359 edits ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery 
Line 1: Line 1:
{| align="right" style="background:#F8FCFF;" {| align="right" style="background:#F8FCFF;"
|- |-
|{{archive box|] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]}} |{{archive box|] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]}}
|- |-
| &nbsp; <!-- whiteline --> | &nbsp; <!-- whiteline -->
Line 38: Line 38:
|- |-
| {{User:Debresser/What's up?}} | {{User:Debresser/What's up?}}
|-
| {{User:Debresser/What more's up?}}

|} |}
__TOC__ __TOC__
Line 60: Line 57:
::: Yes. But thanks for the suggestion. ] (]) 18:20, 29 August 2012 (UTC) ::: Yes. But thanks for the suggestion. ] (]) 18:20, 29 August 2012 (UTC)


* I now have over 10,000 favicons, and the number of orphans is down to 11! ] (]) 00:56, 23 October 2013 (UTC) * I now have over 10,000 favicons on, and the number of orphans is down to 11! ] (]) 00:56, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


== Special characters == == Special characters ==


{{tl|helpme}} {{Tl|Help me}}
Just like & #123; gives &#123;, I would like to know how to make , and '. Where is there a list of these things? I looked, e.g. in ], but didn't find what I am looking for. ] (]) 12:57, 13 March 2009 (UTC) Just like & #123; gives &#123;, I would like to know how to make , and '. Where is there a list of these things? I looked, e.g. in ], but didn't find what I am looking for. ] (]) 12:57, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
:http://www.degraeve.com/reference/specialcharacters.php --] (]) 13:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC) :http://www.degraeve.com/reference/specialcharacters.php --] (]) 13:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Line 70: Line 67:
:::If there is, it's well hidden. --] (]) 15:21, 13 March 2009 (UTC) :::If there is, it's well hidden. --] (]) 15:21, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


::::] ---'''''—&nbsp;]<span style="color:darkblue">&nbsp;'''''</span><sup>]</sup> 13:35, 14 May 2009 (UTC) ::::] ---'''''—&nbsp;]<span style="color:darkblue">&nbsp;</span>'''''<sup>]</sup> 13:35, 14 May 2009 (UTC)


== May 2021 ==
== TUSC token: 2214f14d9938ca34406a77c7801e2c4e ==


<div class="user-block" style="padding: 5px; margin-bottom: 0.5em; border: 1px solid #a9a9a9; background-color: #ffefd5; min-height: 40px">]To enforce an ]&nbsp;and for violating a topic ban, you have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''1 month'''. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions. <p>If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the ] (specifically ]) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. --><span style="font-size:97%;">{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=Please copy my appeal to the &#91;&#91;WP:AE{{!}}arbitration enforcement noticeboard&#93;&#93; or &#91;&#91;WP:AN{{!}}administrators' noticeboard&#93;&#93;. ''Your reason here OR place the reason below this template.'' &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;}}</span>. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the ] on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (]), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.&nbsp;</p><sub>signed, </sub>] <sup>]</sup> 04:32, 23 May 2021 (UTC) <div class="sysop-show"><hr/><p style="line-height: 90%;"><small>'''Reminder to administrators:''' In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following ] regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" ). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."</small></p></div></div><!-- Template:uw-aeblock -->
I am now proud owner of a account!
: Whatever. "If you believe this block is unjustified," I do. "please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing." and you'll understand that there is no chance an admin will admit they make unnecessary and biased blocks. Nothing personal. ] (]) 16:57, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
:: Good for you. In my recent AN to remove an IBAN, I was subjected to bad faith and then told that since it's working, no use in removing it. Yet somehow I don't think the same people would say the same for people in prison, otherwise we'd have full prisons all over the world considering they don't commit crimes. This place is not what it used to be and why I'm semi-retired and probably will go full retired if things continue on the same path of toxicity and stupidity. Just look at the AE about JzG, someone who should have been blocked several times by now but of course nothing will get done. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:25, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
::: I gave a lot to this project, over 10 years and over 100,000 edits. If some stupid, or biased, admin thinks that all of that should be thrown out of the window because of what he perceives as a minor problem, although I would disagree with calling my behavior problematic, especially when compared to certain other edits, then that is their problem, and this project's net loss. I have a life, and am not interested in fighting such shortsighted bureaucrats, nor do I think that it is feasible. ] (]) 21:04, 24 May 2021 (UTC)


== ] has an ]==
Didn't work the first time. Sigh... ] (]) 16:28, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>''']''' has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the ''']'''.<!-- Template:Rfc notice--> Thank you. ] (]) 13:24, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
This tool, http://toolserver.org/~magnus/flickr2commons.php, sucks! At the moment, at least. ] (]) 17:02, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


== Misplaced Pages Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict...please fill out my survey? ==
== Favicon #18 and #19 ==


Hello :)
http://www.quantummuse.com https://advertise.baltimoresun.com/portal/page/portal/Baltimore%20Sun/FAQ ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 05:02, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
I am writing my MA dissertation on Misplaced Pages Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and I noticed that you have contributed to those pages. My dissertation will look at the process of collaborative knowledge production on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the effect it has on bias in the articles. This will involve understanding the profiles and motivations of editors, contention/controversy and dispute resolution in the talk pages, and bias in the final article.
: I am so grateful! 08:56, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
:: I doubt I ever saw that second link. It must be that the favicon was previously used on more baltimoresun pages. ] (]) 09:07, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
For more information, you can check out my or my , where I will be posting my findings when I am done.
I would greatly appreciate if you could take 5 minutes to fill out ''before 8 August 2021.''


Participation in this survey is entirely voluntary and anonymous. There are no foreseeable risks nor benefits to you associated with this project.
: You're welcome. You can find several more. Go to http://images.google.com and click on the little camera at the end of the search box. Enter the URL of one of your favicon's and it will search for similar images. I think most of them will give some hit, though you can't be sure it is the original page using the favicon. I believe Bing also has a type of search that looks for similar images. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 09:28, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
:: I have tried that, and even found one or two, but the ones that are left I couldn't solve in this way. Maybe I'll try it again, since it is about two years since I last tried that. Thanks for the idea. ] (]) 10:27, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks so much,
::: They must have improved it, since that is how I found those two. And I only tried 3 of them. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 10:55, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
:::: I used the tool today, and found a few more. Thanks to you the number of 'orphans' is down to 11. That is the largest change I have ever had in one day. And one more icons was also found by the tool, just that I couldn't reproduce it. ] (]) 23:57, 22 October 2013 (UTC)


Sarah Sanbar
== Formal mediation has been requested ==
{{Ivmbox
| <!---MedComBot-Do-not-remove-this-line-Notified-Palestinian stone-throwing--->The ] has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Palestinian stone-throwing". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. ] is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the ], the ], and the ], '''please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate.''' Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 16 December 2015.


] <sup>]</sup> <sub>]</sub> 00:31, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.<br>
<small>Message delivered by ] (]) on ] of the Mediation Committee. 21:39, 9 December 2015 (UTC)</small>
}}


: I posted there that I will be happy to participate. @Johnmcintyre1959 well done for turning to mediation. ] (]) 12:27, 11 December 2015 (UTC) : {{U|Sarabnas}} Is this still relevant, or was the August 8 deadline absolute? ] (]) 15:19, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
::Hi, it's still relevant if you haven't yet filled it out and would like to! Thanks :) ] <sup>]</sup> <sub>]</sub> 16:53, 12 August 2021 (UTC)


== Noahide Laws == == Administrators' noticeboard ==


] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.&nbsp;The thread is ].&nbsp;The discussion is about the topic ]. Thank you.<!--Template:Discussion notice--><!--Template:ANI-notice--> ] (]) 02:27, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
I know you have an interest in this so see this proposal to remove repeated material. See the new section on the Talk Page.


== Maimonides ==
https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Seven_Laws_of_Noah ] (]) 09:40, 11 December 2015 (UTC)


: I noticed it, since the page is on my watchlist, but thanks for the post. I agree there is room for improvement. ] (]) 12:15, 11 December 2015 (UTC) Hey Debresser, could you look at the proposed changes in ] and give your feedback? Thanks!] (]) 20:32, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
: Have replied there with a proposal for two edits. ] (]) 12:23, 11 December 2015 (UTC)


: "Unexplained removal". I did explain it, on the talk page. It is not at all clear that the section on the Thirteen Principles is not found in the Mishneh Torah (I pointed out the place it is found), therefore the section shouldn't present that as uncontested fact. It is better to state the matter as it is stated in the main article discussing the Thirteen Principles, which is what I changed it to - copying the quote from there, and that is more correct. ] (]) 18:59, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
== Reference errors on 12 December ==
:: Thank you for your reply. I now see that you must be referring to a discussion in the middle of the talkpage ]. Will look at it and will reply there. ] (]) 20:35, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
::: And I replied there too. ] (]) 22:45, 9 August 2021 (UTC)


== Haredi Judaism ==
] Hello, I'm ]. I have '''automatically detected''' that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. {{#ifeq:1|1|It is|They are}} as follows:
*On the ] page, caused a ] <small>(])</small>. ( | )
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a ], you can .
Thanks, <!-- User:ReferenceBot/inform -->] (]) 00:38, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
: Fixed. Thanks. ] (]) 11:06, 13 December 2015 (UTC)


Hey Debresser, Thanks for looking over content in Maimonides! Can you look over recent discussion on Haredi divorce?] (]) 16:20, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
== Sepphoris ==


== Could you help file a SPI ==
], the guy had deleted the photo of the mosaic (from Sepphoris), and replaced it with a photo of a statue of the "virgin Mary," saying that simply because she was allegedly born in Sepphoris her photo (statue) should replace the photo of the mosaic. That is pure nonsense!] (]) 16:57, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
: And I think it makes perfect sense. Not that I mind having the mosaic as well. ] (]) 17:33, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
::Well, if you feel that the photo of a statue belongs in the article, at least it should not be put in the lead, as if it were important.] (]) 18:31, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
::: Okay, I am fine with it being moved elsewhere in the article. That seems more appropriate, yes. ] (]) 22:06, 15 December 2015 (UTC)


Hey Debresser, it seems that {{u|Hipocrite}} may be a sock of Orchomen. However, as an IP it is difficult to file a SPI. Could you do it? Thanks!] (]) 01:50, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
== Request for mediation accepted ==
{{Ivmbox
| The ] of the dispute concerning Palestinian stone-throwing, in which you were listed as a party, '''has been accepted''' by the ]. The case will be assigned to an active mediator within two weeks, and mediation proceedings should begin shortly thereafter. Proceedings will begin at the case information page, ], so please {{plainlinks|1={{fullurl:Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/Palestinian stone-throwing|action=watch}}|2=add}} this to your watchlist. Formal mediation is governed by the Mediation Committee and its ]. The Policy, and especially the first two sections of the "Mediation" section, should be read if you have never participated in formal mediation. For a short guide to accepted cases, see the "Accepted requests" section of the ]. You may also want to familiarise yourself with the internal ].


Here are some diffs which show how Hipocrite only edited a page after Pipsally, the sock of Orchomen already commented. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=1037319040
As mediation proceedings begin, be aware that formal mediation can only be successful if every participant approaches discussion in a professional and civil way, and is completely prepared to compromise. Please ] if anything is unclear.


https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=One_of_Us_(2017_film)&diff=prev&oldid=1037264488 ] (]) 01:52, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
For the Mediation Committee, ] (]) 22:09, 16 December 2015 (UTC)<br>
: Don't waste your time Debresser, it's not me. I think you should be very careful asking for SPIs though 155... Boomerang!] (]) 06:41, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
<small>(Delivered by ], ] the Mediation Committee.)</small>
}}


Not my cup of cake. ] (]) 22:51, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
== Really? ==


:FYI, since Hipocrite has 22,000+ edits the likelihood of them being a sockpuppet is exceedingly low. Very much not worth your time.--] <sup>(]</sup> <sup>])</sup> 22:37, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
, a weak one, but an insult none-the-less. It's not likely to get the kindest response from me or anyone. Essentially calling me an idiot is likely to get your ass crawled in. But being 4 days (3 in Australia) from Christmas, I'll take the high road.
:: True as well. ] (]) 15:21, 12 August 2021 (UTC)


== Haaretz ==
switched templates, but what is on the page remained the same. Both templates generate "This list is complete and up-to-date as of ". All you did was remove the day . You haven't changed anything on the page but the removal of the day. The change is unnecessary and the lack of the day is itself vague. - <small style="white-space:nowrap;border:1px solid #FF7518;padding:1px;">] • ] • 08:11, 21 December 2015 (UTC)</small>


Hey Debresser, if you know any media outlets or reporters can you please bring their attention to the RSN? Some of these responses are not okay. If the only way to deal with this is through media attention, then so be it. All the best! pinging {{u|IZAK}} because page protection.] (]) 21:17, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
: The difference is not in the text that the template generates, but in the categories. Adding a day, ruins the categorization. That is the fact that you apparently are not aware of regarding maintenance templates. If you want to see that as an insult, or read into that that I consider you an idiot, then be my guest. ] (])
: Nope. Not interested. ] (]) 22:52, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
::If a day ruins the categorization, then fix the categorization. Don't mess with thousands of pages because of one categorization code. - <small style="white-space:nowrap;border:1px solid #FF7518;padding:1px;">] • ] • 09:12, 21 December 2015 (UTC)</small>
::: There are over 100 maintenance templates, and all that use dated categorization use only month and year, no day. Those templates tag millions or articles. And you complain about the around 450 articles that used this template with a date?! See what I mean, you don't know how the maintenance templates work! ] (]) 09:50, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
::::Again with the insult. But still, you are doing this the hard way. Instead of fixing the code on those 100 or so maintenance templates, you are changing the templates on millions of articles. See the problem here? You fix millions instead of fixing 100+. Fix the date code and give your mouse a break. - <small style="white-space:nowrap;border:1px solid #FF7518;padding:1px;">] • ] • 10:14, 21 December 2015 (UTC)</small>
::::: Are you really stupid, or just pretending? All those millions of transclusions work with month and year only, no day. The only ones that had a day parameter are the 450 I fixed. ] (]) 11:28, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
::::::I suggest you stop the personal attacks, right now. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>(]&nbsp;·&nbsp;])</small> 12:30, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:::::::{{Ping|Debresser}} Wow, you just can't help yourself, can you? You didn't "fix" 450 of them, only 52. Of those 52, they had remained that way for several years with no issue. So why the change now?


== Query ==
:::::::Since MSGJ said it, I'm going to as well but with more force, violate ] again, and I'll report you. - <small style="white-space:nowrap;border:1px solid #FF7518;padding:1px;">] • ] • 12:34, 21 December 2015 (UTC)</small>
:::::::: I foxed about 480 of them, you can check this in my contributions, which, it seems, you also don't know how to use.
:::::::: As to your threat of persuing the ] issue. Please note that ''you'' posted on ''my'' talkpage, with statements that clearly show your ignorance regarding Misplaced Pages workings. Stating so much is 1. not an attack 2. within the leeway an editor has on their talkpage. ] (]) 20:13, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
:::::::::Wow, you ''really'' don't know how to stop yourself, do you? You apparently have been so caught up in insulting me, you have forgotten what we are talking about. We are talking about the "List of radio stations in " pages. I could care less about the others. Of those, you "fixed" 52. Get it now? From now on, please stay with the conversation instead of thinking of new and interesting ways to insult people. - <small style="white-space:nowrap;border:1px solid #FF7518;padding:1px;">] • ] • 02:16, 22 December 2015 (UTC)</small>


Hello, how are you? hope you are well, can you review this article ] and if it's ok can you move it to mainspace thanks a lot !
It should be fairly easy to get the templates to ignore the day in a date if given. And it might be one edit to the meta-template rather than having to edit 100s of individual templates. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>(]&nbsp;·&nbsp;])</small> 11:24, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
: Reviewed, in short. Please see my edit and the edit summary. Feel free to write me here again afterwards. BTW, why did you choose to ask ''me'' to review this article. ] (]) 13:45, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
: I guess you want to open a theoretical discussion, MSGJ? Are you still stalking my talkpage? :)
:: This user is globally banned; see ]. <b>] ]</b> 14:37, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
: That is correct, however, none of the templates I know (doesn't include updates implemented after switching to LUA) does that. Nor do instructions on maintenance templates documentation pages say to use a day parameter, just month and year. The only exception, and that for a reason, is {{Tl|As of}}, as far as I can remember. ] (]) 11:28, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
: By the way, not sure how easy it would be. In any case, I don't think it is a good idea to ignore code. Better not have it. ] (]) 11:29, 21 December 2015 (UTC) ::: {{Ping|Ohnoitsjamie}} I see. What would that mean for the draft, which, frankly I was considering to move to mainspace after a few improvements? ] (]) 15:23, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
:::: The article was ] per a recent AfD. The user is an abusive ] and shouldn't be encouraged in any way. <b>] ]</b> 15:29, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
::I think if an editor adds a parameter which is correct (even if unnecessarily specific) then ideally the template should function properly and not produce an error. Even if it is a rare occurrence, if we can fix it we probably should. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>(]&nbsp;·&nbsp;])</small> 12:30, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
::: That would be a fundamental change to all maintenance templates, which should be discussed at a broad forum. ] (]) 20:13, 21 December 2015 (UTC) ::::: I see. That discussion was indeed only a month ago. I also noticed ]. A shame, because I though the article was coming along nicely. ] (]) 17:06, 28 August 2021 (UTC)


=== Deleting tags === == Are you a moderator ? ==


are you a moderator ?
Someone can't leave well enough alone. See , repeated 50 times. I've taken the liberty of restoring the tags. --] | ] 13:34, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
:Calton, remember, you were ordered to stay away from me just as I was ordered to stay away from you. - <small style="white-space:nowrap;border:1px solid #FF7518;padding:1px;">] • ] • 13:56, 22 December 2015 (UTC)</small>
:: Neutralhomer, your efforts to get out from under this tag, will get you blocked. let me warn you that your edits are becoming ]. ] (]) 15:58, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
:: I see that you have the same problem with . Please notice that that as well, is a completely normal edit, and you are disrupting the works of this project. ] (]) 16:07, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
:::One, don't threaten me. Two, myself and another user have tried to work with you on this matter and you are stonewalling, verging on OWN'ing. You believe that reverting and insults are going to get you anywhere, it isn't. - <small style="white-space:nowrap;border:1px solid #FF7518;padding:1px;">] • ] • 18:29, 22 December 2015 (UTC)</small>
:::: I am not threatening you. Again, this is your attitude, to see everything as an insult or thread. I was giving you a legitimate warning.
:::: If I am stonewalling you, it is because there is a way things are done, and your refusal to go that way, not because of any personal motives. ] (]) 21:49, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
::::: you are are being "assholish", perhaps it's you. You are also stonewalling ] as well. So, maybe it's your attitude and not mine. - <small style="white-space:nowrap;border:1px solid #FF7518;padding:1px;">] • ] • 22:02, 22 December 2015 (UTC)</small>
:::::: Then let it be our first agreement, to agree to disagree. ] (]) 22:09, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
:::::: By the way, please notice, that I am replying to both you and Rich with arguments. Unlike you. Also note, that Anomie has agreed with some of my arguments. ] (]) 22:10, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
:::::::Look, I thought (as did Mlaffs) that removing the template (which only dated the pages) was a good move. It kept the same information on the page and made everyone happy. Made Mlaffs happy, made me happy, apparently didn't make you (or Calton) happy. So it wasn't a template, who cares. It was the same info. So, why is that a problem? - <small style="white-space:nowrap;border:1px solid #FF7518;padding:1px;">] • ] • 22:32, 22 December 2015 (UTC)</small>


if so can you please look over the article ]
== Holy anointing oil ==


"The Joint Artificial Intelligence Center (JAIC) (pronounced "jake") is an American organization on exploring the usage of Artificial Intelligence (AI) (particularly Edge computing), Network of Networks and AI-enhanced communication for use in actual combat."
I am very surprised that a man of your intelligence and superb work has made the reversions you have made. I will list my rebuttal:
: Not really, no. I am more or less not interested in editing any more. ] (]) 20:47, 30 August 2021 (UTC)


== Oolite ==
1. CALAMUS. This article has been stalked by a cult of drug heads for over a decade. There is a group called the THC Ministry (http://www.thc-ministry.org/). They zealously promote the teaching that the calamus in the Holy Anointing Oil was cannabis/marijuana
After some advice vis-a-vis the Oolite wiki. See your User: talk page there. Cholmondeley <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 14:42, 21 October 2021 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
(http://www.keyway.ca/htm2004/20040815.htm). They continue to make changes to the article concerning calamus. On other sites they claim Moshe, Aaron and the priests were stoned, that Christ and his disciples were stoners, etc. One of them made a recent edit which was removed. It said, “The identification with Cannabis is the most possible explanation from a pharmacological perspective, as it is the only plant of the three usually mentioned canditates (sic) for 'kaneh bosem', that could also scientifically account for all the biblical healing wonders without any need for spiritual explantations (Placebo) for the claimed healings.”


== ] has been nominated for discussion ==
I first discovered this article while researching for a book I was writing on the Holy Anointing Oil. This article was a stub which focused on the marijuana factor. I made changes and had to battle these guys for a long time. I suggest you look back in the History and read the Talk section. That marijuana was in the oil is a fringe theory. The mainstream is calamus. Most all of the Bible translations translate וּקְנֵה־ בֹ֖שֶׂם as “sweet calamus,” “sweet cane,” or “sweet reed.” Sula Bennet suggested cannabis which the fringe group grabbed hold of and ran.


<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>''']''' has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. ] ] 04:57, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
The introductory ingredients list of the HaMishchah features the most widely accepted translations of those ingredients as “Myrrh, cassia, kaneh bosem and cinnamon.” Do you notice anything peculiar about this list? Only ONE has the untranslated name while all the others are in English. This is NOT consistent. Only ONE redirects to an alternate theory section. All the others redirect to an article bearing the English name.
: Thanks for the notice. ] (]) 06:17, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
Of the ingredients listed only ONE provides alternative theories. For example Myrrh is simply listed as "myrrh" and not as every substance every translator believes may have been the myrrh referred to here. Myrrh is believed by some to have been labdanum, some believe it was a musk from living deer, others believe it to oppobalsamum, some believe it to was commiphora myrrha while others believe it was oppoponax. If we were to include every substance thought to be the myrrh, cassia, etc. there would be no room in the beginning of this article and much confusion. There is room in the rest of the article to discuss alternate theories. In all fairness I added the Cannabis section for all the THC enthusiasts who feel calamus is cannabis.


== ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message ==
2. CONTINUITY. I wrote 95% of this article. I added the Continuity section for those who believe in the continuity factor of the anointing oil. WHY would the “Christianity” addition concerning healing and having NOTHING to do whatsoever with continuity be in that section? It is stupid and out of place. Thats what this section is all about—continuity. If there needs to be a Rabbinical section and a Christian section, then it should be created. DON'T put it in the Continuity section if it does not specifically deal with continuity.


<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
3. WHO. The first sentence in that sections says, “Some believe in the continuity factor relative to the holy anointing oil. The last sentence tells you WHO believes this and provides references: “The continuity factor relative to the holy anointing oil can be found in rabbinical judaism, in the Armenian Church, in the Assyrian Church of the East in the Coptic Church, in the Nazrani and Saint Thomas churches, and others.” So why was “who” put in there in the first place? Why was it deleted when I pointed to “who” by inserting “(see below).”
<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</td><td>Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2021|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
I hate to see this article overtaken by potheads but I am not going to quibble. I would prefer to civilly discuss this matter further and attempt a joint edit text that we can then propose on the basis of our mutual agreement.


If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:19, 23 November 2021 (UTC)</small>
Thank you.
</td></tr>
] (]) 14:11, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
</table>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2021/Coordination/MM/03&oldid=1056563210 -->


==ד"ש מחב"דפדיה==
: Sure. Please give me a day to look into this carefully. ] (]) 20:14, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
מה נשמע? יש עכשיו מיזם חדש של חב"דפדיה (האנציקלופדיה החב"דית הוירטואלית היחידה ברשת) ואנחנו נשמח אם תעזור בתרגם ערכים מעברית לאנגלית, האם תוכל לעזור לנו בזה? אשמח לתשובה! יחי המלך. (מפעיל מערכת בחב"דפדיה) ] (]) 01:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
: אני לא כל כך פעיל יותר, ויש לי מה לעשות בחיים, כך שלא נראה לי שיש לי פאי לעזור במיוחד. אתך הסליחה.


== Hello ==
I wrote this article before I was too Wiki-wise about encyclopedic-type articles. After the holidays I am going to overhaul this article and trim it down significantly. I will keep in touch with you before making major changes. The continuity section NEEDS to be there, but as is it is overpowering the article. That section needs to be reduced and the other section expanded. Thank you. ] (]) 21:35, 21 December 2015 (UTC)


The reason that the S01 mention was made in a section heading—others have begun adding S02 content in the sections immediately above. The added S01 purpose, then, was twofold: (i) a "lane change" sort of signal to readers that we were back in S01, even though S02 was being discussed last, and (ii) to set the stage for others to create a separate section (or section with S01 and S02 subsections), when that same sort of S02 content begins to appear. Yes, with regard to the second aim, the appearance is yet premature. But with regard to the first (and the eventual utility of the second), having it there now may be advisable. ] (]) 21:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
: I reviewed the article again, and don't understand why you want to add the word "Continuity" to the section headers. Could you please explain that for me? ] (]) 17:07, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
: It was indeed premature. Also, reception sections usually don't have different section for different seasons. Not that it would be a problem, but it usually doesn't happen. Most sections don't differentiate between the various seasons, actually, with the obvious exception of the episodes section. ] (]) 23:10, 19 January 2022 (UTC)


== On the position of Rav Moshe Feinstein z'l regarding the prayer for Medinat Israel and related issues ==
People don't seem to understand the meaning of the word "continuity." I think they get it mixed up with "incontinence" or something. They keep adding material that has nothing to do with continuity and it makes the article completely incomprehensible. They seem to think it means "The Holy Oil in Rabbinical Judaism" instead of the "continuity of the Holy Oil in Rabbinical Judaism" or "The Holy Oil in Christianity" instead of the "continuity of the Holy Oil in Christianity," etc. I wrote this a long time ago when still relatively new to Misplaced Pages and evidently did not make the point clear enough. It was too wordy and too detailed. There was not enough scholarly references and too many references to 'pop' theories. I think if this section is radically trimmed down and the rest of the article is expanded then it will be more understandable. The calamus debate is quite problematic and simply irritating. The ingredient list has kaneh bosm listed and it's translation beside it as "kaneh bosm" which is repetitive and redundant compared with the listing of the other ingredients. I overdid the section about stench in the section "In the Middle East." After the first of the year I will make an outline of changes and share them before making changes to the article. Shalom. ] (]) 20:47, 23 December 2015 (UTC)


Hello. I apologize in advance if I'm mistaken, but I have the impression that you are an Orthodox Jewish editor. Could you please take a look at ] regarding Rabbi Feinstein's opinion on the standard prayer for the state of Israel? I'm almost sure that, even if the rabbi himself prefered not to say it, he certanly gave his permission for those who wish to do so. I'm open to being proven wrong, of course. Thanks in advance.--] (]) 16:41, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
: Ok. Looking forward. ] (]) 06:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)


: I haveמ't seen any sources that mention this. The article you mentioned just makes the claim, but does not give a source at all. ] (]) 22:40, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
== ANI ==


== Nomination for deletion of ] ==
As promised above, due to your continued insults, I have addressed your behavior at ANI. ]. - <small style="white-space:nowrap;border:1px solid #FF7518;padding:1px;">] • ] • 02:28, 22 December 2015 (UTC)</small>
]] has been ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> ] (]) 11:43, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
: Thanks for the notification.
: The speed with which your complaint was closed, should be an indication of how much you are taking things out of proportion. I do not think I insulted you at all, just told you things you deserve to hear, in the hope that you will understand that you should be careful in areas you are not competent in. ] (]) 09:21, 22 December 2015 (UTC) : Thanks for the notification. ] (]) 17:26, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
== Nomination for deletion of ] ==
]] has been ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> ] (]) 06:27, 13 February 2022 (UTC)


== Just between us == == Levantine Arabic FAC ==


Hi Debresser,
], ''shalom''. You have been around Misplaced Pages far longer than me, and for that reason alone you are entitled to the respect coming to you. I have noticed, too, that most of your edits here, on Misplaced Pages, are very constructive, and you seem to have a natural knack for detecting things that might be wrong and improper. For that, I say, ''yeshar koach''! While we have had our disagreements, here and there, mostly, after explaining myself, you have allowed my edits to stand. However, in this recent case, where I posted a new article on the "Yom Tov," I was taken aback and surprised by your objection to the article, since we are both ''frum''. I know that you know these laws, just as much as any one of us. So... I am here, my friend, to appeal to your good senses and to cordially ask of you to reconsider allowing the current article to stand. Of course, I would appreciate it if you could also help bring the article up-to-par, so that it will meet Misplaced Pages's standards. I think that, in essence, this is what we're here to do. I might add, by way of jest, that your name, '''Dovid''', in ''gematria'' is 14; and my name, '''Dowid''' (note the Yemenite accent) has also the numerical value of 14. Together, they equal 28, which, in Hebrew, spells <big>כח</big> = "power." So, let us take our concerted power and make things work for the better here. Wishing you all the best, my friend.] (]) 15:44, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
I ]. As you contributed to ] in the past and given your knowledge of Hebrew and Aramaic, I thought you could be interested in reviewing this nomination. Thanks for any help you can provide. ] (]) 08:15, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
:{{tps}} ], first of all there is no "Just Between Us" on the wiki; if you really want private correspondence you have to go off-wiki. Second, I am also ''frum,'' and so are some of the other people who have responded on the subject of this article. The issue for us is not whether the content of the page you created is appropriate—it certainly is—but simply whether this subject needs a separate article in this encyclopedia. That is where we disagree. Understand the following general points:
:*Nobody, but nobody, will look this up under "festival-days". That phrase is really limited to the older Mishnah and Gemara translations. That possibly makes the phrase worthy of a redirect, but not of an article itself.
:*You could possibly justify this article under "Yom Tov", moving the other page to "Yom Tov (disambiguation)." If the article survives, it has to go under that name.
:*Really, the content of the article can be included within ] and ] without any problem. We do not necessarily see the need for an entire independent article on the topic.
:*That said, if two other people support your point of view <u>without your having canvassed them</u>, I will personally change my !vote from '''delete''' to '''neutral.''' I really don't think you need a separate article, but I don't think it's a terrible thing to do, either, provided the name is a useful one. ] (]) 15:59, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
:::], ''shalom''. Your words are well-taken. So, if there's a problem with "style" or "language" (i.e. "Festival-day"), then let us change the title to "Yom-Tov." As for including the content of the article within ] and ], this would, in my humble opinion, seriously distract from the topic, and limit its scope. It's like saying delete the article, ], and incorporate it within the ] article. It seriously takes away from both. As for the people that I personally wrote, asking for their opinion, so-far only one person has answered, and her vote was negative. Would you like me to give a list of the names of the people whom I asked to make a statement? If so, I'll gladly give those names to you.] (]) 16:13, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
::::], ''shalom alekha.'' You need not do that at present; I'm aware of which respondent that was. If you garner more support, I may ask later.
::::I've made some edits to ] to try to incorporate your ideas. Understand that in that context, one must acknowledge that Yom Kippur is colloquially described as a ''Yom Tov.'' In that article, I would not concede that point. And if your article survives, you must include somewhere that people refer to Yom Kippur as ''Yom Tov,'' even though that may not be precisely correct.
::::Right now, consensus is strongly against your point of view. I would encourage you to consider how you would disperse the information to other pages should the result be '''delete.''' ] (]) 16:24, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
::::: Is there much to be dispersed? ] (]) 16:58, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
:::::: Mostly some items of detail related to the ''melachot'' that are permissible on Yom Tov, which probably can go in the article ''melacha.'' ] (]) 18:14, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
:::::::Just got back from the ''shul''. Yes, I know where the consensus stands, but "if there's a will, there's a way" (as they say in English). I have a copy of my page, if all should come to worse, and, yes, I could incorporate them into the other articles. Good night.] (]) 19:09, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
{{od}}
'''This is for your information:''' Page from Oxford edition of the ] (Tractate ''Betzah''), showing the English word used for "Yom Tov." See: ]. Be well. ] (]) 16:59, 24 December 2015 (UTC)


:Thanks for your comment on ]. I agree with you that I also felt the situation was a bit unfair... But anyway, some people eventually reviewed the article, even for such an "esoteric" subject ;) (If you also have some time to read through the article, even if only quickly, and provide some comments, it would be awesome.) Cheers, ] (]) 09:55, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
== ] ==


== Mentioned at a noticeboard ==
Well, I tried to tag you. There were no further responses. What shall I do now? ] (]) 20:14, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
: I think there is no such thing as tagging on Misplaced Pages. I replied there. Thanks for dropping me a line here. That is always the best way to get my attention. ] (]) 20:40, 23 December 2015 (UTC)


Please see ]. ] (]) 14:37, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
== OTD and List of OTD ==
: This notice was removed since that specific report was malformed and declined. However, a ] was opened, and the other editor blocked for half a year. ] (]) 18:51, 23 April 2022 (UTC)


== ] ==
Hi,
Just wanted to let you know that I think I'm out, so it's all yours, if you want it. ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 21:33, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
: Why would you want out? Please don't leave me alone with that mess. ] (]) 21:38, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
: By the way, did I know you under your previous name here on Misplaced Pages? ] (]) 21:40, 30 December 2015 (UTC)


Do you also agree with Necrothesp and disagree with the community regarding ], ], and ]? You believe each of these should be disambiguated too? Just trying to understand your perspective. —] ] 13:57, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
:: as it stands now, he's going to report me for deleting a list of books. It's just not worth it. I can try but explaining why Begin wasn't OTD or Spinoza wasn't to someone who doesn't want to listen is not good for my nerves. Just look at the talk pages. ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 21:46, 30 December 2015 (UTC)


: You should take it easy and allow people to disagree with you without trying to convince them again and again or asking about all kind of other issues (even related ones). This is becoming a bother. ] (]) 15:27, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
:: (ec) most likely, I changed my name only recently, I think we fought under my old name, not sure if it was under my new name, but the old name is just my Hebrew name. I took a break for a few years though. ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 21:46, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
::Nice dodge. —] ] 20:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)


== Impulse ==
::: May I ask you to disclose me your old name, please? If you want you can use my email (listed on my userpage). ] (]) 21:53, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
::: I agree with you that the list of books is not proper, and have undone it. Why should he report that? It is a Misplaced Pages guideline, and common sense. ] (]) 21:54, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
:::: That's why I told him to feel free to report me.] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 21:56, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Yossiea was my username, feel free to revert or undo.
: Yeah, we interacted. I think we disagreed a little. But lately we have been agreeing, so let's stick with that. :) ] (]) 22:12, 30 December 2015 (UTC)


How do I prove this, exactly? She says it in Episode 7 of Season 1, "He Said, She Said". I can find several sources that call it sexual assault-is that good enough?] (]) 23:06, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
== You Have Been Reported ==
: The article already calls it attempted rape. I'd say that that is even clearer. ] (]) 14:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)


== A barnstar for you! ==
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 04:48, 31 December 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
: See? Well, at least we're in it together. I see he deleted your edit war tag from his talk page so that the admins won't see it on his talk page. ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 05:30, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
:: The ANI post was summarily closed. :) That should make some point to this Kugel. ] (]) 09:54, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
:: By the way, he is lucky it was closed, because ] would have easily lead to his block for a day or two. ] (]) 09:55, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
== ANI Report ==
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. ] (]) 15:37, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Editor's Barnstar'''
: Thanks. I expect this discussion will lead to your block, as per ], since you are indeed, as you mention in your post there, the source of the problem. ] (]) 15:59, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
|-
:: Another WP:ANI discussion summarily closed. Are people on a drunk, or something? :) I am referring more to the posting editors than to the closing admins, although the latter can't be disregarded off-hand as well. ] (]) 17:38, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
:: Note that Midas02 was clearly warned that he acted without taking into account the previous discussion, with an explicit mention of ] to his address. ] (]) 17:39, 31 December 2015 (UTC) |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thanks for your work on ]. It’s a short, but informative article, and a pleasure to read. ] (]) 08:38, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
|}


: {{Ping|Viriditas}} Are you sure you meant to give this barnstar to ''me''? ] (]) 16:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
== Anybody else want to report me in 2015? ==
:: ] (]) 23:37, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
::: Ah. I see now. That was 2009. ] (]) 15:25, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
::::Better late, than never! Thanks for your good work. ] (]) 09:09, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


== Strange Empire ==
You still have a few minutes, and your edit warring clearly proves that you are right, so take your chances now! ] (]) 17:41, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
:I was going to put a blocked template for the fun of it, but by the looks of things, you might actually get a threepeat. ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 19:13, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
:: After editing for over 7 years, and having reached some very nice compromises on difficult issues, I have not much respect for reverters. In addition, I absolutely refuse to be intimidated by them, which is the reason conflicts often escalate. Still, I think that is preferable to giving in to the brute-force attempts of reverters to push through their incorrect or non-consensus opinions. ] (]) 19:21, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
:::I'm not sure if you saw or not, but you were just reported to Editor Request, which is one of the noticeboards. ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 19:40, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
:::: Of course I didn't see that. One can't follow all those noticeboards just in case. Apart from the fact, that any normal editor believes he couldn't have done anything wrong. :)
:::: That's why reporting editors are kindly requested, and sometimes obligated, to notify the ones they are reporting. Where is this noticeboard? ] (]) 19:53, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
::::: https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Editor_assistance/Requests I think it's meant for article assistance or something. ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 19:56, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
::::: Thanks for the link. How do you keep up with all that mischief? :) I posted there also. Now let's see what other editors will advice him. I won't go back there unless invited. ] (]) 20:03, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
:::::: My little notification lit up otherwise I would never had known. I told him on the talk page to go to DR, otherwise perhaps it's best for you to boomerang him. A SPA who only has one article is not worth the fight. ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 20:07, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


I thought that Kat said her father was Cree and her mother white, so neither is Métis, just her. Since that means people of mixed European and Indigenous descent, she's not half Métis but full. Or did I remember that wrong?] (]) 19:59, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
One could argue that the second paragraph of is inviting a third WP:ANI post. What do you say, should I remove it? ] (]) 23:55, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
: Episode 4 00:15:52,279 --> 00:15:53,410 I am Metis. 00:15:55,114 --> 00:15:57,030 Raised by my Cree father. 00:15:57,303 --> 00:15:59,178 My good Christian mother,
: So yes, you're right. My bad. ] (]) 20:34, 2 July 2022 (UTC)


== Disambiguation link notification for July 6 ==
== Should we fix ten thousand pages where intitle and looksfrom templates show up in print? ==


Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ]<!-- (&nbsp;|&nbsp;)-->. Such links are ], since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. <small>(Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].)</small>
Dear Debresser, please help fix the tangled issue of {{t|intitle}} on dab pages. I've tried. It's gone from the template talk page to ] talk page, and now to ] talk page, and currently started afresh at ] talk page. Please give some light on the matter. The latest productive incarnation is ]. &mdash; ]] 21:51, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
: It's not just on disambiguation pages. I think search templates should not be used at all on articles, including on disambiguation pages. If we can easily remove them, and if we should replace them by something else, I don't know. I personally feel like removing them and that's it. ] (]) 23:12, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
== Reference errors on 31 December ==


It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 09:15, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
] Hello, I'm ]. I have '''automatically detected''' that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. {{#ifeq:1|1|It is|They are}} as follows:
*On the ] page, caused a ] <small>(])</small>. ( | )
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a ], you can .
Thanks, <!-- User:ReferenceBot/inform -->] (]) 00:18, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
: Fixed. Thanks. ] (]) 00:48, 1 January 2016 (UTC)


== Arbitration election RfC ==
== Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion ==
]
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at ] regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on ]. <!--Template:An3-notice--> Thank you. ] (]) 07:27, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
: Thank you for the notification. I had hoped it wouldn't come to this. In any case, I have posted there. ] (]) 09:59, 1 January 2016 (UTC)


Regarding : note that option 3d is proposing to allow sockmasters to have multiple votes. ] (]) 16:43, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
== Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in. ==
]
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the ] regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!<!--Template:DRN-notice-->] (]) 02:14, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
: Well, you have to like an if you're a ], no? ] (]) 06:28, 3 January 2016 (UTC)


== The stranger (The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power) ==
== Friendly note: Returned to sender ==


You have written (]) "Then you will see that there is only one stranger mentioned in the summary of the previous episode." Actually in episode 1 there is " discover a strange man inside a meteor crater.". "Strange" is not "stranger". ] (]) 19:41, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Well if you want to pursue this you'd better do it on your own talk page.
: Yeah, well, that is not a big difference, and it is that strange man the word "stranger" refers to, obviously. Was that so hard to understand? ] (]) 18:57, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
<small>returned to sender from my talk page. ] (]) 20:10, 3 January 2016 (UTC) </small><br>
If you would have mentioned the merger ''discussion'' in the edit summary of edit, I wouldn't have reverted. ] (]) 06:11, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
:So, your failure to check whether the merge discussion (which has been advertized for the last six months) had actually taken place is somehow my fault? And "Friendly"? ? ] (]) 23:48, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
:: I wrote this before. When I was still friendly. :) And I don't hold grudges. ] (]) 06:09, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
::: Or apologize either, it seems... ] (]) 23:11, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
:::: I don't think I was wrong. A discussion which opened half a year ago, which hardly had any participants at all, and in which I haven't participated? I have seen thousands of pages and tons of drama since then. Why should I remember such a discussion, and a halfhearted one at that? You should have mentioned the merge discussion in the edit summary. Yes, and I should have checked for one as well. Still no need for either of us to apologize. If anything, your post on my talkpage using "WTF" was unacceptable, as in ], and your apologies will be appreciated. ] (]) 07:04, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
:::::Do you really want to pursue this?
:::::Do you honestly think ] (a common enough expression of anger/frustration/surprise, with an implied expletive) is uncivil? Or that your response was any less so? If I had said (for example)“what are you playing, at you fucking idiot” ''that'' would have been uncivil.
:::::Do you really think I had no reason to be angry, frustrated or surprised because, after spending a couple of hours sorting the merger mess out, you wander along and undo it in 30 seconds with your ] edit.
:::::You were hardly unaware of the merger, seeing as you put a merge tag there nor were you unaware of the merge discussion, as you sent a friendly note/veiled threat to Setareh . So if you objected to the merge, why the hell didn't you register your objection at any time over the last six months? And if you didn't object to the merger, WTF was the problem?
:::::And you weren't expected to remember it, you were expected to ] that if a page is slated for a merger, sooner or later people will offer an opinion and eventually someone is going to come along and resolve it. And you are also expected to ] if a merger takes place that someone had a good reason to do so, unless you know otherwise.
:::::And, when you realized you'd made a mistake, you could have simply acknowledged the fact, or (if you are the type of person who finds it impossible to admit you are wrong) you could have just walked away, and deleted my message with an acerbic comment (Oh, ). Instead you try and pass off your failures as being ''my'' fault: Mention the merge discussion? ]. ] (]) 23:53, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message ==
:::::: Of course I want to pursue this.
:::::: Yes, I honestly think so. That posting WTF on my talkpage was uncivil.
:::::: Please have a look at the continuation of ]: ] where the text of the edit summary of a merge is given <code><nowiki>Merged content to ]. See ].</nowiki></code> Did you follow that instruction, or did you omit the latter part? Yes, let me hear you admit it... :) ] (]) 00:04, 1 January 2016 (UTC)


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
:And in reply to your latest comment (complete with your little smirk symbol :), again)
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px;">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2022|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
:I don't have any qualms about admitting I failed to mention the merge discussion, what I am a long way from admitting is that my omission had any bearing on, or provides any excuse for your, manifold failures in this matter, viz:
:Your failure to assume (or even consider) the merger was done in good faith
:Your failure to carry out even the simplest checks if you thought it wasn't (or even to send me a message asking WTF ''I'' was playing at)
:Failure to mention any objection to a merger any time in the last six months prior to it being carried out
:Failure to acknowledge any fault of yours in this, but instead manufacturing some fatuous objection to try and shift the blame
:(and, you could add, a failure to recognize rhetorical question/s when presented with them)


If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)</small>
:If and when you are prepared to admit to all (or even any) of these failures you can ping me. ] (]) 20:10, 3 January 2016 (UTC)


</div>
:PS: And I suggest any incivility assumed from my WTF comment is more than outweighed by the incivility of your reply, so we are even on that, too). ] (]) 20:10, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2022/Coordination/MM/03&oldid=1124425182 -->


== Chabad ==
:: I see no imperative reason to do this on my talkpage, apart from your obvious reluctance to have this on yours. Still, I object to the dumping of an ongoing discussion on my talkpage.
:: I do not think my expletive in the <u>edit summary</u> on ''my'' talkpage, not yours, outweighs your expletive in a <u>post</u> on my talkpage. Especially since mine was only in reaction to yours.
:: I am not unwilling to acknowledge my faults. I would have done so right away, had you been able to give a hint of being capable of the same regarding your post, which, again, came before my reaction, timewise.
:: I am under no obligation to comment on the merger process.
:: I never assumed the merger was done in bad faith. Your claim above that I did, is in itself a bad faith assumption. An edit can be reverted even when it was done in good faith.
:: I agree that I should have checked more scrupulously. The obvious reason I didn't do so is your failure to mention any form of preceding discussion in your edit summary. ] (]) 21:22, 3 January 2016 (UTC)


Odd. I'm sure you are right but I've got the widget that colours dubious sources and Chabad is shown as "generally unreliable". I'll try to find out where it gets its information from. I thought it was RA/PS but evidently not. ] (]) 20:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
:::Well first, the reason we are doing this here is because you are the one who wants to pursue it. For my part we can jack this in any time you like.
:The widget is ] but maybe I failed the sanity checks test. The article has rather too many external links and I saw an obvious candidate to reduce the list by one. It still does but I'll leave it to others to do a ] evaluation henceforth. --] (]) 21:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
:::Second, you still reckon the term WTF is an expletive; I don't. OTOH you don't reckon telling me “Fuck yourself” is an expletive because it was only in an edit summary, and on your own talk page; I do. So we are at an impasse on that one.
::Chabad is listed at ] which is one of the sources for the script. It notes the RFC where it was discussed. ] <sup>]</sup> 22:37, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
:::Third, your suggestion that my claim that your assumption the merger was done in bad faith was a bad faith claim, is also itself a bad faith suggestion; and we could go on for a long time in that vein. And I'm well aware that good faith edits can be reverted, but you generally need a good reason, or be acting within the current consensus, to do so. Did you? Were you? But if you look at what I said, I suggested you reverted the merge either because you thought it was done in bad faith, or because you knew it was in good faith but reverted it anyway; to my mind the former is the more charitable explanation.
:: First of all, that Rfc was not closed. Secondly, it was a rather limited discussion. Thirdly, and mainly, it was not visited by even one Chabad editor, who could give some counterweight to some of the claims there. That makes any conclusion of that discussion lopsided. Frankly, I see two editors whose opinions are IMHO clearly a reflection of their biases, rather than fact. ] (]) 21:07, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
:::Fourth, you were “under no obligation to comment...” well of course you were! If you objected to the merge you should have said so. The merger was proposed, discussed (after a fashion) over a six month period, closed and carried out, all without a peep out of you; then once it was done, you wandered up and undid a couple of hours worth of work: Do you expect me not to be annoyed about that? Even if you had commented, then reverted against the closure, that would have been bad enough; but if you reverted because you objected without even having tried to contribute to the discussion, that is borderline disruptive: And to revert when you  didn't object, but just felt like doing so, is borderline vandalism. So what the (insert your own expression here) were you playing at?
:::And “I should have checked more scrupulously” is a little short of the truth; it's blatantly obvious you never checked at all, otherwise you would have seen the closure notice as plain as day.
:::Oh, and this ({{ping|Debresser}}) is a ping, BTW. ] (]) 23:46, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
:::# Whatever.
:::# Okay.
:::# I stick with my point of view.
:::# You are wrong.
:::# I know what a ping is, but it is not as though that ping will show up on my alerts or anything, so it doesn't really have a function.
:::: You ignored ], and still ignore my argument referring to it. It is really simple, you know: you made an edit that ignored a Misplaced Pages guideline, so in any disagreement that arises as a result, you are the one who is in the wrong. That's all there is to this, and no reason to waist more words. ] (])
:::::Actually it's even simpler than that: you made a high-handed edit, and when challenged over it, chose (rather than acknowledging the fault) to resort to bluster and ].
:::::If ignoring guidelines is the issue, maybe you should take the plank out of your own eye before looking for the speck in mine; if I offended the letter of one part of WP:Promerge (which I have already dealt with twice, now, incidentally), you offended the spirit and the letter of WP:Merge in general, as well as ] and ]; and, depending on why you carried out the edit (which you still haven't explained), offended against either ] or ]. Or, if you are now saying you reverted ''because'' I “ignored” ProMerge, then you were ].
:::::And yes, this is a waste of time and words (and ], for all I know) but as you insist on prolonging it, the argument's waistline continues to expand, doesn't it? ] (]) 22:55, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
:::::: This last post was a lousy attempt to have the last word, rather than acknowledge your mistake. Please feel free to post a reply at your convenience, if it is so important to you to have the last word. ] (]) 08:00, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
:::::::An attempt to have the last word? What are you on about? This is your argument, on your talk page; if you don't want to pursue it, stop arguing! Specifically, stop saying stuff that requires an answer. To be clear, I have acknowledged the mistake, twice; what I haven't acknowledged is that it offers any excuse for your action (which you still haven't explained, BTW)
:::::::If you want to agree to differ, fine ("Whatever", "Okay", "I stick with my point of view") If you are going to throw out a challenge ("You are wrong"), or lie ("rather than acknowledge...") you'll end up with a reply. Over to you... ] (]) 23:06, 15 January 2016 (UTC)


== Jewish genetic debate on Khazar hypothesis talk page ==
== January 2016 ==
] You currently appear to be engaged in an ]&#32; according to the reverts you have made on ]. Users are expected to ] with others, to avoid editing ], and to ] rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.<br/>
Please be particularly aware that ] states:
# '''Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made'''.
# '''Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.'''
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's ] to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents ] among editors. You can post a request for help at an ] or seek ]. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary ]. If you engage in an edit war, you '''may be ] from editing.'''{{Break}}''and 2. failing to ] / attempt to reach consensus for non-standard dab page i.e. 3. ]. Two reverts in 24hr, and reverts either side of that making 4 reverts (or more). Although there's discussion on the talk since, continuing to push despite consensus and without gaining consensus and general OWN means this is a disruptive edit warning (but with the ew template, and yes templating a regular). It is ''your burden'' to familiarise yourself with MOSDAB before editing dab pages, and taking an aggressive line towards dab project editors who all agree this dab has issues goes against consensus of MOSDAB and editors. Looking at your talk/block history, stop this disruption now. ''<!-- Template:uw-ew --> <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span>; ]</span> 14:29, 4 January 2016 (UTC)


Dovid, since you're an active Wikipedian and you've talked about the genetics section of the Ashkenazi Jews entry in the past, I wonder if you would like to weigh in on the current "Request new section to discuss Brook 2022 and later studies that confirm or disconfirm it" (related to genetic evidence) at https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Khazar_hypothesis_of_Ashkenazi_ancestry#Request_new_section_to_discuss_Brook_2022_and_later_studies_that_confirm_or_disconfirm_it which relates to multiple currently undiscussed peer-reviewed sources that could be summarized in some manner on the page ], which has restricted-access for editing. Only three longtime Misplaced Pages editors have responded with their opinions thus far. ] (]) 20:08, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
: You come bulldozing in from some WikiProject, and ignore existing consensus with your edit. You should not be surprised that you are being reverted then. Nominating that page for deletion in the middle of an active discussion on what needs to be improved, is also a faux pas. In addition, your post on the talkpage are inflammatory. I think it is you who should be warned for disruptive behavior in view of these three things. ] (]) 14:52, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
: I do remember that there were significant POV concerns with this subject. But I won't be the fourth, since this is not a subject that I am overly interested in. ] (]) 13:02, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
::Responding to another editor who's described the situation as an "aggressive editor", I'm not sure exactly who they mean. You were lucky to not be blocked already as your edit summary indicated you're aware this is covered by discretionary sanctions, so you may be blocked for going over the 1RR repeatedly at any time. Added to ] at AfD and talk, plus general ] / burden of reaching consensus. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span>; ]</span> 15:17, 4 January 2016 (UTC)


== Edit summary ==
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span>; ]</span> 16:58, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
: Thank you. I think that discussion will probably lead to your block, per ], since you violated 3RR. ] (]) 17:58, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
::In reality, because that accusation is false and seen as such and dismissed, this is another location I'm asking you to strike, or provide diffs for thank you. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span>; ]</span> 20:31, 4 January 2016 (UTC)


Hi, I see you're an experienced user, so I'm sure you know that it's not OK to call editors dicks in edit summaries. It's also OK to remove unsourced statements. Just restore it with a source as you did. Thanks ''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 05:56, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
] Your recent editing history at ] shows that you are currently engaged in an ]. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's ] to work toward making a version that represents ] among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See ] for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant ] or seek ]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary ].
: It is completely okay to call other editors ] when they are indeed dicks. Editors have been called worse without impunity. I would say, if an editor doesn't want to be called a dick, they shouldn't edit like a dick. For me, an editor who removes information that can easily be sourced claiming the lack of a source as their reason - is a dick. I hope I have not offended you. ] (]) 00:38, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
::Well you are offending me by calling me a dick. I didn't know the source for the information and you can easily provide the source. If someone adds something without a source it may be reverted. ''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 00:40, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
::: And you need to do absolutely everything that you are allowed to? You could have add a {{Tl|Citation needed}} tag, for example. You could have looked for a WikiProject or editor to help out with finding a source. That would have been better. But please don't be offended. ] (]) 00:44, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
::::I agree, in my limited time editing wiki, I have found too many dicks deleting as unsourced, where they could add citation needed. ] (]) 02:12, 1 March 2023 (UTC)


== Nomination for deletion of ] ==
'''Being involved in an edit war can result in your being ]'''&mdash;especially if you violate the ], which states that an editor must not perform more than three ] on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;'''even if you don't violate the three-revert rule'''&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.{{Break}}''When knowing that it is a contested refactor which should not be repeated, this is pure disruption - I've already edit summaried that a contested refactor should never be repeated per ] etc. This is more akin to disruption , whereas the previous also removed my content. ''<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span>; ]</span> 20:26, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
]] has been ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> ] (]) 12:45, 27 February 2023 (UTC)


== RoP audience response ==
: Please refrain from painting my talkpage with these undeserved tags. ] (]) 21:49, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
: The only good thing coming out of these tags, is that since you are the one who is edit warring with me, they prove that you are aware of the problem in your own edits as well, which save me the trouble to have to warn you. ] (]) 22:02, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
:I general, it is considered bad taste to tag experienced editors with standard warning templates. But it seems ] is not much of a guideline for you. ] (]) 22:02, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
::At ANI, you've been asked by two editors '''to strike your 3RR allegation, but have yet to do that there, and at all places mentioned (afDs, above etc)'''. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span>; ]</span> 12:11, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
::: Which one, the one with 4 edits or the one with 5 edits? ] (]) 12:39, 8 January 2016 (UTC)


I appreciate you trying to find a solution to this but adding unsourced details to the article isn't ideal. The lead should summarise what's in the article body, and the series article does not discuss the audience response. I am open to including a section on the audience response at the series article, but it needs to be an accurate and well-sourced summary of the season article's section. That is going to be difficult due to how complex and controversial the audience response has been. My preference would actually be to have some sort of note in the series article's reception section pointing readers to the season article where they can get full details on the audience response. I'm not sure if there is any precedent for that sort of thing that we could follow. - ] (]) 05:37, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
WP:ANI post closed with a warning to both editors to stop the edit war. I am not happy that Widefox wasn't blocked for his 3RR violation and general disruptive attitude. ] (]) 17:53, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
: {{Ping|Adamstom.97}} I agree with your words. In my opinion the audience response should be in the series article as well. Then, the short sentence (which I copied from the season article), would be summarizing the article.
: Moreover, I would move a lot of stuff from the season article to the series article. In my experience and opinion, the season article is not often necessary, but if it exists, it should be specific to the season, while the audience response is mostly connected to the series as a whole (which at the present happens to be only one season, but that is incidental).
: What I think is <u>not</u> right, is the previous situation, where there was no mention of the audience response. That is leaving out important information, and gives the impression of somebody censoring the article. ] (]) 10:50, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
::The season information definitely should not be all duplicated on the series article. The audience response we are talking about is for the first season only, we currently do not know how the second season will be received. Our options are to only mention the audience response on the season article, or include a brief summary of it at the series article as well. - ] (]) 00:29, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
::: The later, obviously, at this stage. ] (]) 02:50, 12 March 2023 (UTC)


== Comment about unspecified article ==
== Template talk:Short pages monitor ==


Hi ]. Pleased to meet you.
You may be interested in the discussion at ]. —] (]) 23:33, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
: Thanks. ] (]) 18:16, 1 February 2016 (UTC)


In the film there are also Andrea Scarduzio and Salvatore Ruocco, why are you removing them from me? ] (]) 12:06, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
== no original research includes original translations. ==


: I see that you are referring to ].
On wikipedia, quotes must be sourced. Translations need to be cited. You cannot provide your own translation, even if it is superior. That's original research. If you want to go around re-translating things, you are going to need a reliable source. ] (]) 20:02, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
:{{ec}}{{tps}} That's actually not correct. See ]. ] (]) 22:00, 1 February 2016 (UTC) : Please review ], especially where it says "blue links". That is why in my edit summaries I wrote "Remove redlinked." ] (]) 20:07, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
:: Also, says ] who replaced a long-standing good translation with one that is easily proven to be inferior, if not outright incorrect. ] (]) 22:51, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
:: Note also that the present translation is sourced! The only difference between the source and the translation in the article is the word "And", which is very much in the Hebrew. The new proposed translation was far off from both the source, and the original Hebrew. ] (]) 22:58, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
:::Pardon this intrusion by a talk page stalker. While StevenJ81 is right (of course) that an editor's translation is okay -- it's something I've done myself -- I think you ought to mention it in the footnote instead of giving the reader the impression that we're quoting the English-language source. Just a thought. —&nbsp;]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub> 23:24, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
:::: I am happy to have such talkpage stalkers as the two of you. :) We ''are'' using the source, just adding the word "and", which should be trivial enough to leave unmentioned. You disagree? ] (]) 23:43, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
:::::Thank you. I looked at the article again and I see the source of my confusion: footnote 4 is being used twice for two different translations of ''Avot'', one of which looks like it hews close to the source and the other not so much. Take a look at the "Golden Rule" section. —&nbsp;]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub> 00:05, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
:::::: I am looking only at the "And if not now when?" part of the translation, which is the part the editor changed, and it looks the same to me in both sections. Am I missing something? ] (]) 08:32, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
:::::::In the second paragraph of the article's lead section, the famous saying is given as "If I am not for myself who is for me? And being for my own self, what am 'I'? And if not now, when?" but in the section titled "Golden Rule", a paragraph that starts "In Avot, Hillel stated "If I am not for myself, who is for me? And when I am for myself, what am "I"? And if not now, when?"" Footnote 4 links to , which translates the saying as quoted in the lead. So the middle portion of the saying is translated differently in the two parts of the article, but both cite the same source for the translation. —&nbsp;]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub> 03:16, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
:::::::: I see. I indeed only looked at the third part, which is the part that was recently edited. So perhaps change the second part in the lead. Although I personally like the other translation better, but it is probably easier to stick to the source. ] (]) 08:33, 3 February 2016 (UTC)


== Nefesh B'Nefesh and Rabbi Yehoshua Fass articles ==
== Someone has a severe case of I hate Israel ==


Hi Debresser, based on your extensive interest in all things Jewish, would you please take a look at the ], the founder of Nefesh B'Nefesh, I posted in my userspace? Following the ] resulting in a redirect, I updated the draft for the Wiki community to consider for an independent article.
] ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 21:59, 1 February 2016 (UTC)


I would also appreciate your consideration of my ] for the ] page. Thank you very much! ] (]) 06:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
: Yeah, he's been at it for years. Like in ], ] and others. It is awful that someone should good good academic sources to make a political statement based on a choice of words as opposed to the intention of those sources. ] (]) 23:01, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
::] and ] were also informative and significant contributions. ] (]) 11:58, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
::: Your rebbe must be beaming with pride. Why don't you give me your information so I can let him know where to send a gift basket? ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 14:30, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
::::Genuine rebbes and their Hasidim boycott the internet. (]?) But a well deserved barnstar from you would give me a real ego boost. ] (]) 14:49, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
:::: Yes, I remember those articles as well. We haven't intersected for a while, and I felt the better for it. Nevertheless, on a personal level, since that is where this user talkpage discussion is going, I would really like to understand where you come from. Because I find it hard to understand why you are pushing the term "Palestinian" so much. ] (]) 15:09, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
:::::I come from the East but my rebbe is ]. ] (]) 19:05, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
:::::: I didn't mean geographically, I meant ideologically. ] (]) 22:48, 2 February 2016 (UTC)


: I appreciate you coming to my talkpage, however I am not very active lately on Misplaced Pages and have a lot of real-life obligations taking up most of my time. ] (]) 22:51, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
== Restoring a dead link ==


== Topic ban ==
Hey {{u|Debresser}}, I saw that you undid my edit and thereby returned "alternative" terms for Targeted Killing, which are sourced to <s>a dead link</s> what may be an online dictionary and to globalresearch.org. In your revert you explained, "Restore sourced information. In addition, I am not sure terms need much sourcing." You didn't leave a note on the talk page, that might have explained how the dead link isn't one, how globalresearch is a valid source, or why sources aren't needed in this case.


Just a reminder, that needs to be lifted for you to edit in the ARBPIA topic area. Which ] is in. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 19:22, 8 October 2023 (UTC)</small>
We've all (mostly) been guilty of hitting the undo button to bring back unsourced content without actually checking it out, so I just wanted to leave a note here to see if you actually followed that link you restored? If you want to maintain these more partisan phrases (both pro and against Targeted Killing) you'll want to find sources. -] (]) 01:34, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
: Hadn't thought of that. In any case, a technical edit, of no import. ] (]) 19:58, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
::] <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 12:02, 19 October 2023 (UTC)</small>
::: A minor talkpage discussion. Come on guys, this is so old news. ] (]) 16:48, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
::::That was four days ago, and you are banned from talk page discussions on the topic. You can either appeal your topic ban or you can respect it or you can be reported the next time. Im removing the ban violation per ]. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 16:51, 19 October 2023 (UTC)</small>
::::: I meant the ban itself when I said "old news". These things should expire after a year or so, let alone a few years. Remove whatever you want, just check if there is no interaction ban against it. ] (]) 16:53, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
::::::That's not what indefinite means, but I dont have an interaction ban with anybody. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 16:54, 19 October 2023 (UTC)</small>
::::::: I would be happy to see you support the lifting of my topic ban. Much water has flowed in the Jarden river ever since, as the Israeli saying goes, and I feel it is about time to lift this restriction, that is not - nor was it ever - in the best interest of this project. ] (]) 18:45, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
::::::::Gilabrand was just indeffed for edits like ]. Either appeal your ban or abide by it, but you keep pushing this like this its gonna end with an indef. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 18:56, 23 October 2023 (UTC)</small>
::::::::: The system is flawed. I see nothing wrong with this edit. An innocent edit to an article that I read out of personal interest. I see that you understand me. I do refrain from more serious edits, because of the ban. ] (]) 19:53, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Either appeal your ban or abide by it. But ] is yet another violation. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 21:37, 29 November 2023 (UTC)</small>
: The page simply is of personal interest to me. I noticed a missing "i" and made the edit. You see perfectly well that I do not make other edits, although there have been plenty of times I wanted to do so. I think you could say "thank you", or simply let this go. No personal vendettas, please, even if your correct. ] (]) 18:42, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
::no personal vendetta or i would have reported you. but you cannot keep disregarding your ban because you feel like it. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 20:25, 2 December 2023 (UTC)</small>
::: Let me make the following proposal: if I make an edit that ''you'' think is not neutral, I promise to revert it. Not that I plan to make any edits in to IP-conflict area that are so extensive that they can be not neutral, but just in case. ] (]) 16:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
::::That isn’t how topic bans work, they apply to all edits, good or bad irrespective of what I think of them. Appeal the ban or abide by it. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 17:49, 3 December 2023 (UTC)</small>
: I'd appeal the topic ban, which is old and IMHO should have expired after a year or so, but they want you to grovel through the mud, which I am simply not going to do. ] (]) 18:56, 2 December 2023 (UTC)


== ] ==
: Whether they are "more partisan" or not, which is a question I think can be be disputed, these are terms that are in use. ] (]) 12:16, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
: Better source added. I dislike people disputing facts on technical grounds. It is called "wikilawyering". ] (]) 12:25, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
: And I dislike people removing information without having at least the most minor look whether they can provide a better source themselves. ] (]) 12:27, 5 February 2016 (UTC)


Re , "5% newer based on a chronological epoch set by a different religion" isn't a strong claim? :) ] (]) 14:38, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
::<s>Thanks - I'll keep you likes, and dislikes, in mind next time you decide to revert for milon.walla.co.il or globalresearch. -] (]) 15:32, 5 February 2016 (UTC)</s> <small>striking snark. -] (]) 19:16, 5 February 2016 (UTC)</small>
: I don't understand these words: "5% newer based on a chronological epoch set by a different religion". Please explain. ] (]) 17:58, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
::I agree that it's annoying when people remove content they don't like on technical grounds and without replacing with better sources. In this case I removed the terms not only because they were poorly sourced, but also because many of them don't appear elsewhere in the article, making their relevance dubious. Thanks for finding more sources. I've also found a few and might add those as well. -] (]) 19:16, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
::: Always happy to see an article improving. ] (]) 16:19, 6 February 2016 (UTC) :: Lame math joke? 21 vs 20 is 5% more. ] (]) 18:32, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
::: Okay. ] (]) 18:36, 23 October 2023 (UTC)


== Edit warring at ] == == ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message ==


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
See ]. There may still be time for you to reply at the noticeboard to avoid a block. ] (]) 23:23, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px; max-width: 100px">]</div>
: 3RR needs to be on the same day, not 30 days or so apart. ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 01:16, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-text">
:: Apparently he has general edit warring in mind. ] (]) 01:36, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2023|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
== Inappropriate revert ==


If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)</small>
"Palestinian wine" means "wine made in Palestine". I thought you had better English skills than that. It even says Palestine on the label. Kindly stop this nonsense. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 22:39, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
: I agree with you now. Sorry that it took me a while. I do disagree with other things, though, which is why I added a few tags to the article. ] (]) 10:52, 10 February 2016 (UTC)


</div>
== That template is well know among template editors ==
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2023/Coordination/MM/03&oldid=1187132125 -->


== April 2024 ==
"That template is well know among template editors to do this, and is used in many such case"
<div class="user-block uw-aeblock" style="padding: 5px; margin-bottom: 0.5em; border: 1px solid #a9a9a9; background-color: #ffefd5; min-height: 40px">]To enforce an ],&nbsp;and for violating your topic ban&nbsp;on the page ], you have been ''']''' from editing Misplaced Pages for a period of '''3 months''' Misplaced Pages. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions. <p>If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the ] (specifically ]) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. --><span style="font-size:97%;">{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=Please copy my appeal to the &#91;&#91;WP:AE{{!}}arbitration enforcement noticeboard&#93;&#93; or &#91;&#91;WP:AN{{!}}administrators' noticeboard&#93;&#93;. ''Your reason here OR place the reason below this template.'' &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;}}</span>. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the ] on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (]), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.&nbsp;</p>] (]) 17:58, 25 April 2024 (UTC) <div class="sysop-show"><hr/><p style="line-height: 90%;"><small>'''Reminder to administrators:''' In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following ] regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" ). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."</small></p></div></div><!-- Template:uw-aeblock -->
Such as ? -- ] (]) 22:36, 15 February 2016 (UTC)


=== Unblock request ===
==Edit War on a topic you are too close to==
] You currently appear to be engaged in an ]. Users are expected to ] with others, to avoid editing ], and to ] rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.<br>
Please be particularly aware that ] states:
# '''Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made'''.
# '''Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.'''
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's ] to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents ] among editors. You can post a request for help at an ] or seek ]. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary ]. If you engage in an edit war, you '''may be ] from editing.'''<!-- Template:uw-ew -->


{{unblock reviewed |1=Please copy my appeal to the ] or ]. According to ] an initial block should be one month, not three months. And that one month has passed. I would like to add that the edits I made (, ) that I was blocked for, were uncontroversial linguistic improvements, and I never had the intention of making any controversial edits, and I think that should be a mitigating factor as well. ] (]) 23:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC) |decline = Declined. You are falsely claiming this was your initial block. It wasn't. Your block log shows a one month block on 2021-05-22 for this topic ban violation. Additionally, there's a two week block on 2021-03-16 which may be for the same thing. In fact, there's a whole raft of blocks for edit warring and for tban violations. If I'm reading it correctly, your current 3 month block would arguably be much too short. You are free to make a new request that addresses these points and another admin will review it. I warn you, though, that any such review would include the real possibility of extending your block. ] (]) 12:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)}}
You are simply too close to topics related to orthodox Judaism to be objective and use third party references that are respected outside of orthodox Judaism. You are attempting to delete them, even though the banner is specifically asking for them on the Mikveh page. Time for you to work on topics you are less POV about. ] (]) 06:20, 16 February 2016 (UTC)


: Okay, whatever. Thanks anyway.
: Don't be so childish. I tag you, you tag me. And accusing me of POV on pages about Judaism is large coming from you. ] (]) 07:28, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
: The claim that this was my first block was made in good faith. I don't remember a block from 3 years ago. Frankly, I have a hard time to consider it even relevant after so much time, and I think it is not a good thing to keep bringing up old history. People move on in life, and this unforgiving and bureaucratic attitude by Misplaced Pages admins is not doing anybody a service, IMHO. ] (]) 13:00, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


== Chesdovi == == To do ==


In the ] article fix the sentence "It also maintains a secondary hub <s>is</s> at Munich Airport". ] (]) 18:31, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I think it's time to report him as a SPI or edit warrior and have him blocked. It's extremely difficult to have to babysit every article. The WW article is littered with his insertions. He basically googles every anti-Jewish or anti-Zionist source he can find and inserts it. I think you are better at this, so do you think this is something whose time has come? Take a look at the article and the talk page. Look at all the sections he has created.] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 04:23, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
:The page is not "littered" with my insertions. is my insertion. It seems there is consensus to re-add Leibowitz, but has Sir Joseph done so? ] (]) 06:31, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
:: See my commentary at ], to the effect that I propose to not discuss people, and try to edit together productively. ] (]) 12:34, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
::: You try to do so. All he does is revert information without discussing, inserting POV FRINGE, how about I leave the page alone for a while? Are you willing to let the western wall become part of the PA? Have you seen his most recent proposal to insert into the article? ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 13:37, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
:::: Let's discuss this civilly and after Shabbes, on the talkpage. ] (]) 14:39, 19 February 2016 (UTC)


is partially incorrect in that films can be fiction or non-fiction, so the article should be in both the fiction and the film category. ] (]) 18:00, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
== Nomination for deletion of Template:Ref New Haven Power ==


Remove ] from the "See also" list at ], as it is already linked in the article proper. ] (]) 21:34, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
]] has been ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> ]]] 04:46, 19 February 2016 (UTC)


: Posted there. Thanks for the notification. ] (]) 12:36, 19 February 2016 (UTC) Remove the capital from ] in the lead section of ]. ] (]) 22:28, 1 May 2024 (UTC)


Change to straight parenthese after . ] (]) 11:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
== A barnstar for you! ==


mixed up the order of Short description and Hatnote. ] (]) 18:09, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"

|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
"On her way back to New London, Indra chases Mustafa and attempts to kill her by flooding the underground tunnel." in ], is incorrect. Indra doesn't chase her. ] (]) 19:44, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "the answer to keeping humans happy forever is...suicide." No dots are needed there. ] (]) 20:33, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Original Barnstar'''

|-
"There are more than 100 Kurc descendants today." in ]. I seem to remember it said "close to 100". ] (]) 17:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC) Yes, the text reads "Todays, direct descendants of Sol and Nechuma Kurc number nearly 100." ] (]) 18:30, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | You deserve it! :-) ].]<small> </small>] 00:17, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

|}
Add "The Down Deep" to ], coming out July 2, 2024. ] (]) 21:04, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

There is some overlinking at ] and superfluous See also links. ] (]) 21:24, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

"Note that there is not a" in ] should be "Note that there is no". ] (]) 14:32, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

is not clear. Either is has 741M minutes, or it hasn't; comparison with other films is not relevant to that question. ] (]) 12:11, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Need to restore this information, which was removed without indication of reason and likely out of misplaced spoiler considerations. ] (]) 16:00, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Need to add a space at ] between "However,Akira". ] (]) 17:15, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Why is ] without a dot after "St"? See also redirects. ] (]) 17:16, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Remove dot from list at disambiguation page ]. ] (]) 15:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC) Likewise remove "Spiritualism (religious movement)" from the See also list at ], since it is included in the hatnote. Also change hatnote to ], instead of the redirect ]. ] (]) 15:21, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

was a bad edit, because {{Tl|FPER}} is itself also a redirect. ] (]) 18:21, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

What was ] disqualified for? ] (]) 13:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Improve the link to "President Park's ]" on ] by making it ]. ] (]) 04:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Check . ] (]) 17:34, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

It is not logical to have that one example in the lead of ]. ] (]) 23:23, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

At ] remove capital from "Geopolitics", add period between it and the reference, and merge related paragraphs in Books section. ] (]) 13:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Reconsider the pipe in edit. ] (]) 17:34, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Remove the comment in the See also section at ]. ] (]) 22:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Link "Circadian" to ] in ]. ] (]) 13:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC) Replace <nowiki>''The strength model'' of time memory. This posits a ''memory trace'' that persists over time, by which one might judge the age of a memory (and therefore how long ago the event remembered occurred) from the strength of the trace. This conflicts with the fact that memories of recent events may fade more quickly than more distant memories.</nowiki> by <nowiki>''The strength model'' of time memory. This model posits a ''memory trace'' that persists over time, by which from the strength of the trace one might judge the age of a memory (and therefore how long ago the event remembered occurred). This models is not consistent with the fact that memories of recent events may fade more quickly than more distant memories.</nowiki> ] (]) 13:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC) "His model separated explicit timing and implicit timing." change to use "distinguished". ] (]) 14:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC) Only the first paragraph of the ] section should be there, while the others should be in a separate section with name to be determined. ] (]) 14:58, 2 June 2024 (UTC) Remove second link to "psychology". ] (]) 15:08, 2 June 2024 (UTC) ] should be added to ]. Fix sentence "Past work show". ] (]) 15:15, 2 June 2024 (UTC) Remove "Time" from the see also section there, as it is already linked in the article. ] (]) 15:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Improve see alsos and external links at ]. ] (]) 15:00, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Add "The Down Deep" to ]. ] (]) 13:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

] claims that ] was a "Kintyre resident", but the Paul McCartney article does not mention that. Use "Kintyre was McCartney’s place of escapism, it helped save him following the devastating split of The Beatles" from {{Cite web |url=https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/paul-mccartney-mull-of-kintyre-song-meaning/ |title=The Story Behind The Song: Paul McCartney track ‘Mull of Kintyre’, a love letter to Scotland |author=Joe Taysom |date=11 November 2020 |publisher=]}}. ] (]) 15:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC) "Paul McCartney purchased High Park Farm, near the Mull of Kintyre in Scotland, on 17 June 1966." not from best source. ] (]) 15:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Remove ] from the See also section of ], since it also linked in the article proper. ] (]) 19:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
text should be restored. Note that the editor restored all the other text as well. ] (]) 18:48, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Restore text that was removed out of spoiler considerations, which we on Misplaced Pages do not accept. ] (]) 18:51, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

revert edit, which ignores ] and uses strange notation. ] (]) 19:24, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

There probably should be a dash in non-Jew. ] (]) 17:48, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Fix the incomplete sentence "sign a 10-year" at ]. ] (]) 21:58, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Do something about "Misaki decides to end it with Jake" in . ] (]) 23:02, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Revert which contradicts the source. ] (]) 22:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Undo edits . ] (]) 22:41, 20 June 2024 (UTC) Likewise undo two parts in this user's edits , nl. about this same subject and changing "Behab" incorrectly to "Behav", as well as move ] as per . ] (]) 22:48, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Undo . ] (]) 18:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

At the end of the plot section of ] replace "passes away" by "died" per WP:EUPHEMISM. ] (]) 20:40, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Add Jewish categories to ]. ] (]) 17:04, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Undo part of , where punctuation was put inside parenthesis against Misplaced Pages guidelines. ] (]) 13:20, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

is annoying. ] (]) 17:09, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Replace the ampersands in ] by normal "and". ] (]) 01:11, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

was not an improvement. ] (]) 17:50, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

are nevertheless correct, with or without a talkpage discussion. ] (]) 17:52, 6 July 2024 (UTC) Also wrong is this spelling. ] (]) 14:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

"assumed to be" should be "assumed to become" in ]. ] (]) 08:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Just some small fixes to : Aramaic language and HaSiddur HaShalem without dash. ] (]) 01:46, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

just seems wrong to me. Check. ] (]) 22:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Revert . ] (]) 17:40, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Undo . ] (]) 17:41, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

== Context inline ==

Reply at ] that this template doesn't have a "reason" parameter, as explained on the documentation of ], and copy the explanation from there to the documentation here. ] (]) 18:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC) So edit should be reverted. ] (]) 16:22, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

:{{tl|Context inline}} and {{tl|Context}} serve different purposes and the rationale is therefore not transferable. {{tl|Context}}, like other templates for the tops of sections or articles, uses <code>details</code> to display the information in plain text to the reader.
:So <code>&#123;&#123;Context |details="This sentence is the result of the <code>details</code> parameter" |reason=This will show nothing.&#125;&#125;</code> results in the following:
:{{Context|details="This sentence is the result of the <code>details</code> parameter"|reason=This will show nothing.}}
:Whereas {{tl|Context inline}} is an inline maintenance tag, and like other inline tags (], ], ], etc.), it uses <code>reason</code> exclusively to display an HTML <code>title</code> for context on hover. &#123;&#123;Context inline|reason=Like other inline tags, this will display as a custom tooltip on hover.&#125;&#125; displays the following: {{Context inline|reason=Like other inline tags, this will display as a custom tooltip on hover.}} <span style="white-space: nowrap;">– <small>''']''' (])</small></span> 23:07, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

:: Okay. Thanks for the explanation. You're right. ] (]) 23:13, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
:::No worries! <span style="white-space: nowrap;">– <small>''']''' (])</small></span> 17:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

== Ban proposal ==

] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.<!--Template:Discussion notice--><!--Template:ANI-notice-->]<sup>&lt;]&middot;]&gt;</sup> 05:13, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

:The discussion is now closed. -] (]) 18:22, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

:: {{Ping|Ad Orientem}} I am intrigued, why this semi-retired erstwhile admin suddenly came up with such a proposal. I checked, and we have no common history on any page on the English Misplaced Pages. Nor does he have a history of making such proposals. In addition, my previous block was more than 3 years old, so his suggestion seems grossly out of place. Please ask {{User|WikiLeon}}, if perhaps he was contacted with the suggestion to make his proposal. In any case, I would like to know how I ended up on his radar, and why he suddenly came up with that proposal. This is a bit too random to be a coincidence. If preferable, you could reopen the discussion at WP:ANI and add my request there. ] (]) 23:42, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
:::@{{u|WikiLeon}} I believe the above is a reasonable question. -] (]) 23:50, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
::::I was browsing around the ] to find this user crossed out on the list (indicating they were blocked). Out of curiosity as to why someone with these rights are blocked, I find their block log of over eight blocks (not counting unblocks) and asked "Why would someone be blocked over half a dozen times and be ]"? ArbCom and the admins already have enough trouble, why is this established editor trying to cause more? This is spitting in the face of ArbCom and the community, what does everybody else think? It seems ] thinks it's more trouble than what it's worth, and that I failed to ]. It wasn't until now I realize the context of the blocks, topics I have no interest in. I accept their decision as resolved and would rather not do something like this ever again. --]<sup>&lt;]&middot;]&gt;</sup> 15:20, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
::::: I appreciate your reply here. I was pretty fluent in template, before LUA came along and many templates were made into modules. Solved many template errors.
::::: I have been an editor for 15 years, including in a highly contentious area (up until my topic ban a few years ago), so a few blocks were to be expected. In general, I think being a good editor is not about avoiding conflict, but about making good edits. Where people work, chips fall.
::::: Till my topic ban, I was very active, making many improvements to many articles, often technical edits. I became disappointed by the bureaucratic attitude I was shown in the discussion leading to my ban, in which admin showed that rules are more important to them than actually improving this project, and since then I only make the occasional edit. ] (]) 17:36, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
==Happy Birthday!==
<!-- ##RW UNDERDATE## -->
{{ombox
| name = Happy Birthday
| image = ]
| imageright = ]
| style = border: 2px solid SlateBlue; background: linear-gradient(to right, #a8ff78, #78ffd6);
| textstyle = padding: 0.75em; text-align:center;
| text = <big>'''Happy birthday!'''</big><br />Hi Debresser! On behalf of the ], I'd like to wish you a very happy birthday! Enjoy this special day! ] (]) 08:40, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
}}

== Death Penalty ==

That's a tricky one isn't it? Especially when there are ]s. What are your thoughts on that? ] (]) 07:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)


== Invitation to participate in a research ==
: Okay. If you say so. Thanks. ] (]) 17:15, 20 February 2016 (UTC)


Hello,
== Courtesy ANI notice ==


The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this ''''''.
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is ]. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. <span style="text-shadow:7px 5px 7px maroon">-- ] <sup><span style="font-size:80%">]</span></sup></span> 21:30, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
: Thanks a lot. I have replied there now. ] (]) 21:45, 23 February 2016 (UTC)


You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
== Was this ever modified? ==


The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ] .
I couldn't find this appeal and it appears this TBAN is still in effect. https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive106#Chesdovi ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 22:06, 23 February 2016 (UTC)


Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
: This is the notification he received on January 15, 2012. It is a WP:ARBPIA ban. I see no reason to say it is expired, but on the other hand, four years is a long time. Then again, he has a huge POV, and his edits are cherrypicking and misleading under a veil of reliable sources. A very smart and dangerous editor, who has been disturbing and influencing Misplaced Pages for many years now. ] (]) 23:21, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
: I also had my clashes with him, see e.g. ], and still think he was disruptive and terribly POV'ed then as well. ] (]) 23:24, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
:: If a ban is never lifted, then it remains in place and you may revert without restriction. I think you should ask to see if it was ever lifted. If it wasn't, I'm sure an appeal will be filed.] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 23:42, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
::: Not all of his problematic edits are in the ARBPIA field. Like his edits to ], for example. Although, if broadly constructed...? Perhaps you would care to post an inquiry at ARBPIA, if the sanctions against Chesdovi are still in force? ] (]) 10:32, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
:::: I think it's best if you do it. They don't like me. I've opened too many clarification requests lately. Plus, I just came off a block. ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 13:40, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
::::: Done at ]. Note, that you are not invited to comment there. ] (]) 20:47, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
::::::Why not? If the TBAN was rescinded, then it was rescinded, but if it wasn't then it wasn't. It's as simple as that. ARBCOM rulings need to be enforced. That is my statements in all my clarification requests to ARBCOM whether it's their stupid 500/30 or other unenforceable or pointless, or admins who get away with NPA violations. If it wasn't rescinded and he does want it rescinded because it's been 4 years, then that's another story and an AE appeal can be filed. But my big thing is following the law, in here and in real life. In this case, we have a TBAN but we don't have a lifting of a TBAN, QED. If you don't want me to edit, you should at least clarify why you are posting a clarification request to ARBCOM. ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 21:48, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
::::::: I am asking ARBCOM to clarify. I would have preferred nobody else answer, if possible. I would even have preferred Chesdovi not to know about it, but the instructions said I must notify him. In your case I would add, that if you claim you are not popular there, then why come there? ] (]) 23:13, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
::::::: You may have noticed that ArbCom seems to think unanimously that the topicban is still in place. ] (]) 23:42, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
{{Od}} to paraphrase someone, it's just the sitra achra. ] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 00:03, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
: As you can see below, my request for clarification was ]. The unanimous opinion of seven editors was, that the topic ban is still in place. When I asked why then did he create ], they said that any violation should be reported through ]. ] (]) 08:47, 28 February 2016 (UTC)


Kind Regards,
== Notification of discussion that might interest you ==


]
https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Zero0000#Western_Wall_2] <sup><font color="Green">]</font></sup> 23:09, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
: All over it. :) Thanks. ] (]) 23:43, 25 February 2016 (UTC)


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 19:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
== Arbitration clarification request archived ==
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Potential_Admins&oldid=27650229 -->


== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==
The ] regarding the '']" arbitration case, which you were listed as a party to, has been closed and archived. For the Arbitration Committee, ''']''' (<small>aka</small> ]&nbsp;'''·'''&#32; ]&nbsp;'''·'''&#32; ]) 07:31, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
: Thanks for the notification. ] (]) 08:44, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
== ==


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
Thanks for message. You are quite right, my talk was not necessary. I'll delete it now! If I shouldn't do that, pls advise. Thx. --] (]) 00:00, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
: Well, it's not as if it was a big deal. It just seemed a little overkill to me. Perhaps, if after a month or so nobody supplies a source, then post on the talkpage. By the way, I made a short search, and couldn't find a clear and reliable source. I did see in one place that Esther was among those who were exiled from Jerusalem, but that is not precisely the same as that she was born there. ] (]) 09:31, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
It was overkill, you are quite right. I appreciate your suggestion about waiting a month, and then taking it from there. My intention was, in the absence of proof, to open up the subject for discussion. If Esther was indeed among those who were exiles from Jerusalem (during the reign of Judean King Jeconiah?) this would make Esther about 100 tears old when she was made (Queen of Persia?) by King Ahasuerus (Xerxes I?)! An interesting concept! <br />
I suspect that the editor who added 'Jerusalem' acted in in haste but in good faith. The article itself says "She had spent her life among the Jewish exiles in Persia, where she lived under the protection of her cousin Mordecai." <br />
It is also interesting to note that the Google page which shows the results of a Google search for esther, says she was born in ]!--] (]) 10:27, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
: I seem to remember that according to tradition she was indeed some 80 years old, so that seems to fit with the idea that she was exiled from Jerusalem. However, I'll have to look into this. I'll try to do so within the foreseeable future, before Purim. ] (]) 12:11, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
:: Most Jewish sources I have been able to find say that she was 75 years old at the time of the story of Purim, while some of them bring other opinions as well, namely: 40, 70 and 80. In English I found , that mentions 40, 75 and 80. However, I had no luck so far in finding anything connecting Esther to Jerusalem or the exile. ] (]) 08:20, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
:: I think we have to come to the conclusion, that there is no such opinion. ] (]) 08:38, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for reference to . Yes, it gives us a lot of information from rabbinical sources re her name, age and marital situation etc. But, as you say, there is nothing that verifies 'Jerusalem' as her place of birth. The onus is always on editors to provide 'reliable source' that directly supports the material they have added. (Ref ]) --] (]) 15:02, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:20, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
== Just to be clear ==


</div>
I thought it implicit that you were not included in my ref. to a 'usual majority'. We have and no doubt will often disagree strongly, but we have managed at times to work well together. I would in any case hope you give, without the need to be hasty, some consideration to the Cisjordan option vs Land of Israel. The Cisjordan (including Galilee) is really what the Torah is about (, see also . It is one of the anomalies in Joshua, for example that the Land of Israel does includes the Transjordan, but at the same time it is stepping over the Jordan which marks the seminal step for entry into the ] (the article map is completely inaccurate), between the very vague ''eretz Israel'' and the more precise ''ha'aretz ha-muvtahat'',whereas modern discourse on origins (well illustrated by the original Zionist insistence that Transjordan be included within the Jewish state) ignores that, and focuses on Cisjordan (Deuteronomy 12:10) as the centre of the Land of Israel, privileging a narrower view of the Jewish heartland. Do modern Jews really think they originate from Jordan? In any case, I'd appreciate it if you mulled this option for a while. As I said, I am not allowed to edit there but I think it a shame that the page is not seriously worked to at least rid it of the numerous errors, sources that fail verification, use of clichés, etc.] (]) 14:09, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
</div>
: This is an issue I am still not decided about as a rabbi, so I can't give an opinion on it yet. ] (]) 20:38, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/03&oldid=1258243506 -->
::That's fine. As I said, it is something that implies some time to study. I wasn't of course asking for a rabbinical view. The question is, whether modern Jews identify themselves as descending from all of the land from the red Sea to the Euphrates (one of the readings of eretz Israel) or basically ''eretz kna'an''. I've never encountered the former view in a lifetime of reading, but if one writes, as you do, that the ethnogenesis occurred in the 'the part of the Levant known as the Land of Israel', you are selecting ''eretz kna'an'', not the ''eretz israel'' that can embrace a far larger area, extending to the Euphrates. No hurry, as I said.] (]) 23:04, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 00:20, 19 November 2024

Archiving icon
Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16


 
What I do
on Misplaced Pages.
My rewards.
What's up?
I mainly follow up on pages from my watchlist, occasionally adding new pages to it that spiked my interest.

Can you help identify these favicons?

I would like to make a little personal use of this talk page.

I collect favicons. I have over 8,000 of them. A few of them are my 'orphans': I do not know the sites they came from.

I you think you could help, and want to do me a big favor, please have a look at them.

My 'orphan' favicons

Thanks! Debresser (talk) 17:09, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Have you tried using Google Images' search by image function. benzband (talk) 17:45, 29 August 2012 (UTC) Please leave me a {{talkback}} if you reply
Yes. But thanks for the suggestion. Debresser (talk) 18:20, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Special characters

{{Help me}} Just like & #123; gives {, I would like to know how to make , and '. Where is there a list of these things? I looked, e.g. in Misplaced Pages:Special_character, but didn't find what I am looking for. Debresser (talk) 12:57, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

http://www.degraeve.com/reference/specialcharacters.php --Closedmouth (talk) 13:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Isn't there anything on WIkipedia? Debresser (talk) 13:11, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
If there is, it's well hidden. --Closedmouth (talk) 15:21, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
List of XML and HTML character entity references ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  13:35, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

May 2021

To enforce an arbitration decision and for violating a topic ban, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the ] or ]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. 

signed, Rosguill 04:32, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" ). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

Whatever. "If you believe this block is unjustified," I do. "please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing." and you'll understand that there is no chance an admin will admit they make unnecessary and biased blocks. Nothing personal. Debresser (talk) 16:57, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Good for you. In my recent AN to remove an IBAN, I was subjected to bad faith and then told that since it's working, no use in removing it. Yet somehow I don't think the same people would say the same for people in prison, otherwise we'd have full prisons all over the world considering they don't commit crimes. This place is not what it used to be and why I'm semi-retired and probably will go full retired if things continue on the same path of toxicity and stupidity. Just look at the AE about JzG, someone who should have been blocked several times by now but of course nothing will get done. Sir Joseph 19:25, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
I gave a lot to this project, over 10 years and over 100,000 edits. If some stupid, or biased, admin thinks that all of that should be thrown out of the window because of what he perceives as a minor problem, although I would disagree with calling my behavior problematic, especially when compared to certain other edits, then that is their problem, and this project's net loss. I have a life, and am not interested in fighting such shortsighted bureaucrats, nor do I think that it is feasible. Debresser (talk) 21:04, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Shem HaMephorash has an RFC

Shem HaMephorash has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Skyerise (talk) 13:24, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict...please fill out my survey?

Hello :) I am writing my MA dissertation on Misplaced Pages Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and I noticed that you have contributed to those pages. My dissertation will look at the process of collaborative knowledge production on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the effect it has on bias in the articles. This will involve understanding the profiles and motivations of editors, contention/controversy and dispute resolution in the talk pages, and bias in the final article.

For more information, you can check out my meta-wiki research page or my user page, where I will be posting my findings when I am done.

I would greatly appreciate if you could take 5 minutes to fill out this quick survey before 8 August 2021.

Participation in this survey is entirely voluntary and anonymous. There are no foreseeable risks nor benefits to you associated with this project.

Thanks so much,

Sarah Sanbar

Sarabnas Questions? 00:31, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Sarabnas Is this still relevant, or was the August 8 deadline absolute? Debresser (talk) 15:19, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi, it's still relevant if you haven't yet filled it out and would like to! Thanks :) Sarabnas Questions? 16:53, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' noticeboard

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Debresser. The discussion is about the topic COVID-19 pandemic in Israel. Thank you. Triggerhippie4 (talk) 02:27, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Maimonides

Hey Debresser, could you look at the proposed changes in Maimonides and give your feedback? Thanks!155.246.151.38 (talk) 20:32, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

"Unexplained removal". I did explain it, on the talk page. It is not at all clear that the section on the Thirteen Principles is not found in the Mishneh Torah (I pointed out the place it is found), therefore the section shouldn't present that as uncontested fact. It is better to state the matter as it is stated in the main article discussing the Thirteen Principles, which is what I changed it to - copying the quote from there, and that is more correct. MikeR613 (talk) 18:59, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. I now see that you must be referring to a discussion in the middle of the talkpage Talk:Maimonides#"Missing"_13_Principles_of_Faith. Will look at it and will reply there. Debresser (talk) 20:35, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
And I replied there too. MikeR613 (talk) 22:45, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Haredi Judaism

Hey Debresser, Thanks for looking over content in Maimonides! Can you look over recent discussion on Haredi divorce?155.246.151.38 (talk) 16:20, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Could you help file a SPI

Hey Debresser, it seems that Hipocrite may be a sock of Orchomen. However, as an IP it is difficult to file a SPI. Could you do it? Thanks!155.246.151.38 (talk) 01:50, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Here are some diffs which show how Hipocrite only edited a page after Pipsally, the sock of Orchomen already commented. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=1037319040

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=One_of_Us_(2017_film)&diff=prev&oldid=1037264488 155.246.151.38 (talk) 01:52, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Don't waste your time Debresser, it's not me. I think you should be very careful asking for SPIs though 155... Boomerang!2001:8F8:1F27:3360:2:1:6BF9:6CDA (talk) 06:41, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Not my cup of cake. Debresser (talk) 22:51, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

FYI, since Hipocrite has 22,000+ edits the likelihood of them being a sockpuppet is exceedingly low. Very much not worth your time.--Shibbolethink 22:37, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
True as well. Debresser (talk) 15:21, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Haaretz

Hey Debresser, if you know any media outlets or reporters can you please bring their attention to the RSN? Some of these responses are not okay. If the only way to deal with this is through media attention, then so be it. All the best! pinging IZAK because page protection.155.246.151.38 (talk) 21:17, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Nope. Not interested. Debresser (talk) 22:52, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Query

Hello, how are you? hope you are well, can you review this article User:Jame wills jame/sandbox and if it's ok can you move it to mainspace thanks a lot !

Reviewed, in short. Please see my edit and the edit summary. Feel free to write me here again afterwards. BTW, why did you choose to ask me to review this article. Debresser (talk) 13:45, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
This user is globally banned; see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet_investigations/علي_أبو_عمر. OhNoitsJamie 14:37, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
@Ohnoitsjamie: I see. What would that mean for the draft, which, frankly I was considering to move to mainspace after a few improvements? Debresser (talk) 15:23, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
The article was deleted and salted per a recent AfD. The user is an abusive WP:LTA and shouldn't be encouraged in any way. OhNoitsJamie 15:29, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
I see. That discussion was indeed only a month ago. I also noticed Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet_investigations/علي_أبو_عمر/Archive. A shame, because I though the article was coming along nicely. Debresser (talk) 17:06, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Are you a moderator ?

are you a moderator ?

if so can you please look over the article Joint Artificial Intelligence Center

"The Joint Artificial Intelligence Center (JAIC) (pronounced "jake") is an American organization on exploring the usage of Artificial Intelligence (AI) (particularly Edge computing), Network of Networks and AI-enhanced communication for use in actual combat."

Not really, no. I am more or less not interested in editing any more. Debresser (talk) 20:47, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Oolite

After some advice vis-a-vis the Oolite wiki. See your User: talk page there. Cholmondeley — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.125.98.212 (talk) 14:42, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Category:Articles needing POV-check has been nominated for discussion

Category:Articles needing POV-check has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:57, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. Debresser (talk) 06:17, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:19, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ד"ש מחב"דפדיה

מה נשמע? יש עכשיו מיזם חדש של חב"דפדיה (האנציקלופדיה החב"דית הוירטואלית היחידה ברשת) ואנחנו נשמח אם תעזור בתרגם ערכים מעברית לאנגלית, האם תוכל לעזור לנו בזה? אשמח לתשובה! יחי המלך. (מפעיל מערכת בחב"דפדיה) שטעטל (talk) 01:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

אני לא כל כך פעיל יותר, ויש לי מה לעשות בחיים, כך שלא נראה לי שיש לי פאי לעזור במיוחד. אתך הסליחה.

Hello

The reason that the S01 mention was made in a section heading—others have begun adding S02 content in the sections immediately above. The added S01 purpose, then, was twofold: (i) a "lane change" sort of signal to readers that we were back in S01, even though S02 was being discussed last, and (ii) to set the stage for others to create a separate section (or section with S01 and S02 subsections), when that same sort of S02 content begins to appear. Yes, with regard to the second aim, the appearance is yet premature. But with regard to the first (and the eventual utility of the second), having it there now may be advisable. 98.253.16.20 (talk) 21:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

It was indeed premature. Also, reception sections usually don't have different section for different seasons. Not that it would be a problem, but it usually doesn't happen. Most sections don't differentiate between the various seasons, actually, with the obvious exception of the episodes section. Debresser (talk) 23:10, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

On the position of Rav Moshe Feinstein z'l regarding the prayer for Medinat Israel and related issues

Hello. I apologize in advance if I'm mistaken, but I have the impression that you are an Orthodox Jewish editor. Could you please take a look at this discussion regarding Rabbi Feinstein's opinion on the standard prayer for the state of Israel? I'm almost sure that, even if the rabbi himself prefered not to say it, he certanly gave his permission for those who wish to do so. I'm open to being proven wrong, of course. Thanks in advance.--Pauleredge (talk) 16:41, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

I haveמ't seen any sources that mention this. The article you mentioned just makes the claim, but does not give a source at all. Debresser (talk) 22:40, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Rabbinic timeline

Template:Rabbinic timeline has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 11:43, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. Debresser (talk) 17:26, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Boca Juniors squad/doc

Template:Boca Juniors squad/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 06:27, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Levantine Arabic FAC

Hi Debresser, I nominated Levantine Article for FAC. As you contributed to Levant in the past and given your knowledge of Hebrew and Aramaic, I thought you could be interested in reviewing this nomination. Thanks for any help you can provide. A455bcd9 (talk) 08:15, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment on Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Levantine Arabic/archive1. I agree with you that I also felt the situation was a bit unfair... But anyway, some people eventually reviewed the article, even for such an "esoteric" subject ;) (If you also have some time to read through the article, even if only quickly, and provide some comments, it would be awesome.) Cheers, A455bcd9 (talk) 09:55, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Mentioned at a noticeboard

Please see Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Debresser and User:Dibol reported by User:DocWatson42 (Result: ). EdJohnston (talk) 14:37, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

This notice was removed since that specific report was malformed and declined. However, a Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Dibol_reported_by_User:PAVLOV_(Result:_Blocked_for_6_months_) subsequent report was opened, and the other editor blocked for half a year. Debresser (talk) 18:51, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Talk:The_Blacklist_(TV_series)#Requested_move_3_May_2022

Do you also agree with Necrothesp and disagree with the community regarding The Godfather, The Office, and The Big Bang Theory? You believe each of these should be disambiguated too? Just trying to understand your perspective. —В²C 13:57, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

You should take it easy and allow people to disagree with you without trying to convince them again and again or asking about all kind of other issues (even related ones). This is becoming a bother. Debresser (talk) 15:27, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Nice dodge. —В²C 20:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Impulse

How do I prove this, exactly? She says it in Episode 7 of Season 1, "He Said, She Said". I can find several sources that call it sexual assault-is that good enough?Mcc1789 (talk) 23:06, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

The article already calls it attempted rape. I'd say that that is even clearer. Debresser (talk) 14:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar
Thanks for your work on Barnard 68. It’s a short, but informative article, and a pleasure to read. Viriditas (talk) 08:38, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
@Viriditas: Are you sure you meant to give this barnstar to me? Debresser (talk) 16:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Yes, I am quite sure. Viriditas (talk) 23:37, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Ah. I see now. That was 2009. Debresser (talk) 15:25, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
Better late, than never! Thanks for your good work. Viriditas (talk) 09:09, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Strange Empire

I thought that Kat said her father was Cree and her mother white, so neither is Métis, just her. Since that means people of mixed European and Indigenous descent, she's not half Métis but full. Or did I remember that wrong?Mcc1789 (talk) 19:59, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Episode 4 00:15:52,279 --> 00:15:53,410 I am Metis. 00:15:55,114 --> 00:15:57,030 Raised by my Cree father. 00:15:57,303 --> 00:15:59,178 My good Christian mother,
So yes, you're right. My bad. Debresser (talk) 20:34, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eiffel (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bolt. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Arbitration election RfC

Regarding this edit: note that option 3d is proposing to allow sockmasters to have multiple votes. isaacl (talk) 16:43, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

The stranger (The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power)

You have written (Special:Diff/1111201803) "Then you will see that there is only one stranger mentioned in the summary of the previous episode." Actually in episode 1 there is " discover a strange man inside a meteor crater.". "Strange" is not "stranger". Meridiana solare (talk) 19:41, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, well, that is not a big difference, and it is that strange man the word "stranger" refers to, obviously. Was that so hard to understand? Debresser (talk) 18:57, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Chabad

Odd. I'm sure you are right but I've got the widget that colours dubious sources and Chabad is shown as "generally unreliable". I'll try to find out where it gets its information from. I thought it was RA/PS but evidently not. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

The widget is User:Headbomb/unreliable but maybe I failed the sanity checks test. The article has rather too many external links and I saw an obvious candidate to reduce the list by one. It still does but I'll leave it to others to do a WP:ELNO evaluation henceforth. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 21:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Chabad is listed at Misplaced Pages:New_page_patrol_source_guide which is one of the sources for the script. It notes the RFC where it was discussed. Sir Joseph 22:37, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
First of all, that Rfc was not closed. Secondly, it was a rather limited discussion. Thirdly, and mainly, it was not visited by even one Chabad editor, who could give some counterweight to some of the claims there. That makes any conclusion of that discussion lopsided. Frankly, I see two editors whose opinions are IMHO clearly a reflection of their biases, rather than fact. Debresser (talk) 21:07, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Jewish genetic debate on Khazar hypothesis talk page

Dovid, since you're an active Wikipedian and you've talked about the genetics section of the Ashkenazi Jews entry in the past, I wonder if you would like to weigh in on the current "Request new section to discuss Brook 2022 and later studies that confirm or disconfirm it" (related to genetic evidence) at https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Khazar_hypothesis_of_Ashkenazi_ancestry#Request_new_section_to_discuss_Brook_2022_and_later_studies_that_confirm_or_disconfirm_it which relates to multiple currently undiscussed peer-reviewed sources that could be summarized in some manner on the page Khazar hypothesis of Ashkenazi ancestry, which has restricted-access for editing. Only three longtime Misplaced Pages editors have responded with their opinions thus far. 2600:1000:B12B:4B91:AC07:3BE4:2814:D456 (talk) 20:08, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

I do remember that there were significant POV concerns with this subject. But I won't be the fourth, since this is not a subject that I am overly interested in. Debresser (talk) 13:02, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hi, I see you're an experienced user, so I'm sure you know that it's not OK to call editors dicks in edit summaries. It's also OK to remove unsourced statements. Just restore it with a source as you did. Thanks Andre🚐 05:56, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

It is completely okay to call other editors dick when they are indeed dicks. Editors have been called worse without impunity. I would say, if an editor doesn't want to be called a dick, they shouldn't edit like a dick. For me, an editor who removes information that can easily be sourced claiming the lack of a source as their reason - is a dick. I hope I have not offended you. Debresser (talk) 00:38, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
Well you are offending me by calling me a dick. I didn't know the source for the information and you can easily provide the source. If someone adds something without a source it may be reverted. Andre🚐 00:40, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
And you need to do absolutely everything that you are allowed to? You could have add a {{Citation needed}} tag, for example. You could have looked for a WikiProject or editor to help out with finding a source. That would have been better. But please don't be offended. Debresser (talk) 00:44, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
I agree, in my limited time editing wiki, I have found too many dicks deleting as unsourced, where they could add citation needed. Riskit 4 a biskit (talk) 02:12, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Articles with disproportional geographic scope progress

Template:Articles with disproportional geographic scope progress has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 12:45, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

RoP audience response

I appreciate you trying to find a solution to this but adding unsourced details to the article isn't ideal. The lead should summarise what's in the article body, and the series article does not discuss the audience response. I am open to including a section on the audience response at the series article, but it needs to be an accurate and well-sourced summary of the season article's section. That is going to be difficult due to how complex and controversial the audience response has been. My preference would actually be to have some sort of note in the series article's reception section pointing readers to the season article where they can get full details on the audience response. I'm not sure if there is any precedent for that sort of thing that we could follow. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:37, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97: I agree with your words. In my opinion the audience response should be in the series article as well. Then, the short sentence (which I copied from the season article), would be summarizing the article.
Moreover, I would move a lot of stuff from the season article to the series article. In my experience and opinion, the season article is not often necessary, but if it exists, it should be specific to the season, while the audience response is mostly connected to the series as a whole (which at the present happens to be only one season, but that is incidental).
What I think is not right, is the previous situation, where there was no mention of the audience response. That is leaving out important information, and gives the impression of somebody censoring the article. Debresser (talk) 10:50, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
The season information definitely should not be all duplicated on the series article. The audience response we are talking about is for the first season only, we currently do not know how the second season will be received. Our options are to only mention the audience response on the season article, or include a brief summary of it at the series article as well. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:29, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
The later, obviously, at this stage. Debresser (talk) 02:50, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Comment about unspecified article

Hi Debresser. Pleased to meet you.

In the film there are also Andrea Scarduzio and Salvatore Ruocco, why are you removing them from me? Cinefilm (talk) 12:06, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

I see that you are referring to The Equalizer 3.
Please review MOS:FILMCAST, especially where it says "blue links". That is why in my edit summaries I wrote "Remove redlinked." Debresser (talk) 20:07, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Nefesh B'Nefesh and Rabbi Yehoshua Fass articles

Hi Debresser, based on your extensive interest in all things Jewish, would you please take a look at the draft of an article for Rabbi Yehoshua Fass, the founder of Nefesh B'Nefesh, I posted in my userspace? Following the 2021 discussion resulting in a redirect, I updated the draft for the Wiki community to consider for an independent article.

I would also appreciate your consideration of my edit request for the Nefesh B'Nefesh page. Thank you very much! LA for NBN (talk) 06:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

I appreciate you coming to my talkpage, however I am not very active lately on Misplaced Pages and have a lot of real-life obligations taking up most of my time. Debresser (talk) 22:51, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Topic ban

Just a reminder, that needs to be lifted for you to edit in the ARBPIA topic area. Which this is in. nableezy - 19:22, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Hadn't thought of that. In any case, a technical edit, of no import. Debresser (talk) 19:58, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
And this? nableezy - 12:02, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
A minor talkpage discussion. Come on guys, this is so old news. Debresser (talk) 16:48, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
That was four days ago, and you are banned from talk page discussions on the topic. You can either appeal your topic ban or you can respect it or you can be reported the next time. Im removing the ban violation per WP:BANREVERT. nableezy - 16:51, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
I meant the ban itself when I said "old news". These things should expire after a year or so, let alone a few years. Remove whatever you want, just check if there is no interaction ban against it. Debresser (talk) 16:53, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
That's not what indefinite means, but I dont have an interaction ban with anybody. nableezy - 16:54, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
I would be happy to see you support the lifting of my topic ban. Much water has flowed in the Jarden river ever since, as the Israeli saying goes, and I feel it is about time to lift this restriction, that is not - nor was it ever - in the best interest of this project. Debresser (talk) 18:45, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Gilabrand was just indeffed for edits like this. Either appeal your ban or abide by it, but you keep pushing this like this its gonna end with an indef. nableezy - 18:56, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
The system is flawed. I see nothing wrong with this edit. An innocent edit to an article that I read out of personal interest. I see that you understand me. I do refrain from more serious edits, because of the ban. Debresser (talk) 19:53, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Either appeal your ban or abide by it. But this is yet another violation. nableezy - 21:37, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

The page simply is of personal interest to me. I noticed a missing "i" and made the edit. You see perfectly well that I do not make other edits, although there have been plenty of times I wanted to do so. I think you could say "thank you", or simply let this go. No personal vendettas, please, even if your correct. Debresser (talk) 18:42, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
no personal vendetta or i would have reported you. but you cannot keep disregarding your ban because you feel like it. nableezy - 20:25, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
Let me make the following proposal: if I make an edit that you think is not neutral, I promise to revert it. Not that I plan to make any edits in to IP-conflict area that are so extensive that they can be not neutral, but just in case. Debresser (talk) 16:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
That isn’t how topic bans work, they apply to all edits, good or bad irrespective of what I think of them. Appeal the ban or abide by it. nableezy - 17:49, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
I'd appeal the topic ban, which is old and IMHO should have expired after a year or so, but they want you to grovel through the mud, which I am simply not going to do. Debresser (talk) 18:56, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Antisemitism in the United States

Re , "5% newer based on a chronological epoch set by a different religion" isn't a strong claim? :) DMacks (talk) 14:38, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

I don't understand these words: "5% newer based on a chronological epoch set by a different religion". Please explain. Debresser (talk) 17:58, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Lame math joke? 21 vs 20 is 5% more. DMacks (talk) 18:32, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Okay. Debresser (talk) 18:36, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

April 2024

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for violating your topic ban on the page Israel–Hamas war, you have been blocked from editing Misplaced Pages for a period of 3 months Misplaced Pages. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the ] or ]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. 

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:58, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" ). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

Unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Debresser (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Please copy my appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard or administrators' noticeboard. According to Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel_articles_4#Enforcement an initial block should be one month, not three months. And that one month has passed. I would like to add that the edits I made (, ) that I was blocked for, were uncontroversial linguistic improvements, and I never had the intention of making any controversial edits, and I think that should be a mitigating factor as well. Debresser (talk) 23:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Declined. You are falsely claiming this was your initial block. It wasn't. Your block log shows a one month block on 2021-05-22 for this topic ban violation. Additionally, there's a two week block on 2021-03-16 which may be for the same thing. In fact, there's a whole raft of blocks for edit warring and for tban violations. If I'm reading it correctly, your current 3 month block would arguably be much too short. You are free to make a new request that addresses these points and another admin will review it. I warn you, though, that any such review would include the real possibility of extending your block. Yamla (talk) 12:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Okay, whatever. Thanks anyway.
The claim that this was my first block was made in good faith. I don't remember a block from 3 years ago. Frankly, I have a hard time to consider it even relevant after so much time, and I think it is not a good thing to keep bringing up old history. People move on in life, and this unforgiving and bureaucratic attitude by Misplaced Pages admins is not doing anybody a service, IMHO. Debresser (talk) 13:00, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

To do

In the Lufthansa article fix the sentence "It also maintains a secondary hub is at Munich Airport". Debresser (talk) 18:31, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

This edit is partially incorrect in that films can be fiction or non-fiction, so the article should be in both the fiction and the film category. Debresser (talk) 18:00, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Remove Japanese tea utensils from the "See also" list at Japanese tea ceremony, as it is already linked in the article proper. Debresser (talk) 21:34, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Remove the capital from Diatoms in the lead section of Endosymbiont. Debresser (talk) 22:28, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Change to straight parenthese after this edit. Debresser (talk) 11:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

This edit mixed up the order of Short description and Hatnote. Debresser (talk) 18:09, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

"On her way back to New London, Indra chases Mustafa and attempts to kill her by flooding the underground tunnel." in Brave New World (TV series), is incorrect. Indra doesn't chase her. Debresser (talk) 19:44, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "the answer to keeping humans happy forever is...suicide." No dots are needed there. Debresser (talk) 20:33, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

"There are more than 100 Kurc descendants today." in We Were the Lucky Ones. I seem to remember it said "close to 100". Debresser (talk) 17:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC) Yes, the text reads "Todays, direct descendants of Sol and Nechuma Kurc number nearly 100." Debresser (talk) 18:30, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Add "The Down Deep" to Catherine_Asaro_bibliography#Major_Bhaajan_series, coming out July 2, 2024. Debresser (talk) 21:04, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

There is some overlinking at Katyn_massacre#2010_70th_Anniversary_of_the_Katyn_massacre_Polish_Air_Force_101_crash and superfluous See also links. Debresser (talk) 21:24, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

"Note that there is not a" in National_conventions_for_writing_telephone_numbers#Netherlands should be "Note that there is no". Debresser (talk) 14:32, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

with over 741M minutes viewed compared to others is not clear. Either is has 741M minutes, or it hasn't; comparison with other films is not relevant to that question. Debresser (talk) 12:11, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Need to restore this information, which was removed without indication of reason and likely out of misplaced spoiler considerations. Debresser (talk) 16:00, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Need to add a space at Tokyo Vice (TV series) between "However,Akira". Debresser (talk) 17:15, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Why is St Brice's Day massacre without a dot after "St"? See also redirects. Debresser (talk) 17:16, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Remove dot from list at disambiguation page Spiritualism. Debresser (talk) 15:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC) Likewise remove "Spiritualism (religious movement)" from the See also list at Spiritualism (philosophy), since it is included in the hatnote. Also change hatnote to Spiritualism, instead of the redirect Spiritualism (disambiguation). Debresser (talk) 15:21, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

This was a bad edit, because {{FPER}} is itself also a redirect. Debresser (talk) 18:21, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

What was Yuliia Osmak disqualified for? Debresser (talk) 13:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Improve the link to "President Park's assassination" on 12.12: The Day by making it President Park's assassination. Debresser (talk) 04:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Check this edit. Debresser (talk) 17:34, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

It is not logical to have that one example in the lead of List of megatall skyscrapers. Debresser (talk) 23:23, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

At Dmitri Alperovitch remove capital from "Geopolitics", add period between it and the reference, and merge related paragraphs in Books section. Debresser (talk) 13:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Reconsider the pipe in this edit. Debresser (talk) 17:34, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Remove the comment in the See also section at Microcephaly. Debresser (talk) 22:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Link "Circadian" to Circadian rhythm in Time perception. Debresser (talk) 13:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC) Replace ''The strength model'' of time memory. This posits a ''memory trace'' that persists over time, by which one might judge the age of a memory (and therefore how long ago the event remembered occurred) from the strength of the trace. This conflicts with the fact that memories of recent events may fade more quickly than more distant memories. by ''The strength model'' of time memory. This model posits a ''memory trace'' that persists over time, by which from the strength of the trace one might judge the age of a memory (and therefore how long ago the event remembered occurred). This models is not consistent with the fact that memories of recent events may fade more quickly than more distant memories. Debresser (talk) 13:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC) "His model separated explicit timing and implicit timing." change to use "distinguished". Debresser (talk) 14:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC) Only the first paragraph of the Time_perception#Philosophical_perspectives section should be there, while the others should be in a separate section with name to be determined. Debresser (talk) 14:58, 2 June 2024 (UTC) Remove second link to "psychology". Debresser (talk) 15:08, 2 June 2024 (UTC) Time perception should be added to Template:Time. Fix sentence "Past work show". Debresser (talk) 15:15, 2 June 2024 (UTC) Remove "Time" from the see also section there, as it is already linked in the article. Debresser (talk) 15:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Improve see alsos and external links at Vierordt's law. Debresser (talk) 15:00, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Add "The Down Deep" to Catherine Asaro bibliography. Debresser (talk) 13:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Mull of Kintyre claims that Paul McCartney was a "Kintyre resident", but the Paul McCartney article does not mention that. Use "Kintyre was McCartney’s place of escapism, it helped save him following the devastating split of The Beatles" from Joe Taysom (11 November 2020). "The Story Behind The Song: Paul McCartney track 'Mull of Kintyre', a love letter to Scotland". Far Out Magazine.. Debresser (talk) 15:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC) "Paul McCartney purchased High Park Farm, near the Mull of Kintyre in Scotland, on 17 June 1966." not from best source. Debresser (talk) 15:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Remove Near side of the Moon from the See also section of Far side of the Moon, since it also linked in the article proper. Debresser (talk) 19:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC) This text should be restored. Note that the editor restored all the other text as well. Debresser (talk) 18:48, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Restore this text that was removed out of spoiler considerations, which we on Misplaced Pages do not accept. Debresser (talk) 18:51, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

revert This edit, which ignores WP:HEBREW and uses strange notation. Debresser (talk) 19:24, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

There probably should be a dash in non-Jew. Debresser (talk) 17:48, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Fix the incomplete sentence "sign a 10-year" at Timeline_of_the_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine_(1_April_2024_–_present)#13_June. Debresser (talk) 21:58, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Do something about "Misaki decides to end it with Jake" in this edit. Debresser (talk) 23:02, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Revert this edit which contradicts the source. Debresser (talk) 22:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Undo edits here. Debresser (talk) 22:41, 20 June 2024 (UTC) Likewise undo two parts in this user's edits here, nl. about this same subject and changing "Behab" incorrectly to "Behav", as well as move Fast of Behav as per source. Debresser (talk) 22:48, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Undo this edit. Debresser (talk) 18:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

At the end of the plot section of The Vanishing of Sidney Hall replace "passes away" by "died" per WP:EUPHEMISM. Debresser (talk) 20:40, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Add Jewish categories to Kaia Gerber. Debresser (talk) 17:04, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Undo part of this edit, where punctuation was put inside parenthesis against Misplaced Pages guidelines. Debresser (talk) 13:20, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

This is annoying. Debresser (talk) 17:09, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Replace the ampersands in Dark Matter (2024 TV series) by normal "and". Debresser (talk) 01:11, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

This was not an improvement. Debresser (talk) 17:50, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

These tags are nevertheless correct, with or without a talkpage discussion. Debresser (talk) 17:52, 6 July 2024 (UTC) Also wrong is this spelling. Debresser (talk) 14:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

"assumed to be" should be "assumed to become" in ]. Debresser (talk) 08:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Just some small fixes to this edit: Aramaic language and HaSiddur HaShalem without dash. Debresser (talk) 01:46, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

This edit just seems wrong to me. Check. Debresser (talk) 22:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Revert mistaken edit. Debresser (talk) 17:40, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Undo pointy edit. Debresser (talk) 17:41, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Context inline

Reply at Template talk:Context inline that this template doesn't have a "reason" parameter, as explained on the documentation of Template talk:Context, and copy the explanation from there to the documentation here. Debresser (talk) 18:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC) So this edit should be reverted. Debresser (talk) 16:22, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

{{Context inline}} and {{Context}} serve different purposes and the rationale is therefore not transferable. {{Context}}, like other templates for the tops of sections or articles, uses details to display the information in plain text to the reader.
So {{Context |details="This sentence is the result of the details parameter" |reason=This will show nothing.}} results in the following:
This article provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject. Please help improve the article by providing more context for the reader, especially: "This sentence is the result of the details parameter". (Learn how and when to remove this message)
Whereas {{Context inline}} is an inline maintenance tag, and like other inline tags (Template:Additional citation needed, Template:Better source needed, Template:Specify, etc.), it uses reason exclusively to display an HTML title for context on hover. {{Context inline|reason=Like other inline tags, this will display as a custom tooltip on hover.}} displays the following: – Primium (talk) 23:07, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
Okay. Thanks for the explanation. You're right. Debresser (talk) 23:13, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
No worries! – Primium (talk) 17:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Ban proposal

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.w 05:13, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

The discussion is now closed. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:22, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
@Ad Orientem: I am intrigued, why this semi-retired erstwhile admin suddenly came up with such a proposal. I checked, and we have no common history on any page on the English Misplaced Pages. Nor does he have a history of making such proposals. In addition, my previous block was more than 3 years old, so his suggestion seems grossly out of place. Please ask WikiLeon (talk · contribs), if perhaps he was contacted with the suggestion to make his proposal. In any case, I would like to know how I ended up on his radar, and why he suddenly came up with that proposal. This is a bit too random to be a coincidence. If preferable, you could reopen the discussion at WP:ANI and add my request there. Debresser (talk) 23:42, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
@WikiLeon I believe the above is a reasonable question. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:50, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
I was browsing around the list of current Template editors to find this user crossed out on the list (indicating they were blocked). Out of curiosity as to why someone with these rights are blocked, I find their block log of over eight blocks (not counting unblocks) and asked "Why would someone be blocked over half a dozen times and be WP:HERE"? ArbCom and the admins already have enough trouble, why is this established editor trying to cause more? This is spitting in the face of ArbCom and the community, what does everybody else think? It seems WP:ANI thinks it's more trouble than what it's worth, and that I failed to WP:AGF. It wasn't until now I realize the context of the blocks, topics I have no interest in. I accept their decision as resolved and would rather not do something like this ever again. --w 15:20, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
I appreciate your reply here. I was pretty fluent in template, before LUA came along and many templates were made into modules. Solved many template errors.
I have been an editor for 15 years, including in a highly contentious area (up until my topic ban a few years ago), so a few blocks were to be expected. In general, I think being a good editor is not about avoiding conflict, but about making good edits. Where people work, chips fall.
Till my topic ban, I was very active, making many improvements to many articles, often technical edits. I became disappointed by the bureaucratic attitude I was shown in the discussion leading to my ban, in which admin showed that rules are more important to them than actually improving this project, and since then I only make the occasional edit. Debresser (talk) 17:36, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Birthday cake emojiHappy birthday!
Hi Debresser! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy birthday! Enjoy this special day! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 08:40, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Party popper emoji

Death Penalty

That's a tricky one isn't it? Especially when there are wrongful executions. What are your thoughts on that? Rolando 1208 (talk) 07:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2024 (UTC)