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 17:57, 3 April 2019 editNishidani (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users99,555 edits RE← Previous edit Latest revision as of 00:20, 19 November 2024 edit undoMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,139,932 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 67: 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)


== Comment response == == May 2021 ==


<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 -->
Hi Debresser, I left you a comment. here https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Haredi_Judaism ] (]) 20:06, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
: 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)


== Reversions at ] and ] == == ] has an ]==


<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)
As always, your lack of self-awareness is astonishing! All the abuse you you lavish on those who dare to disagree with you applies more appropriately to you. ] (]) 01:29, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
: I remember you as a hothead editor, and your recent behavior only confirmed that. ] (]) 10:58, 27 January 2019 (UTC)


== Misplaced Pages Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict...please fill out my survey? ==
== Review while LeChaParat Pesha is open? ==


Hello :)
Somehow I saw the following (Talk:Posek)-
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 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.
<u>Quote</u><p>Actually, most of the rabbis in Category:Chabad-Lubavitch rabbis are very minor figures (most of those articles should be put up for deletion as they violate the basics of not adhering to WP:NOTABLE and WP:BIO) that have been pumped up and fluffed up with PR but that in no way reflects their greatness as rabbis or anything for that matter. Watch out, the editorial sword cuts both ways. IZAK
Thanks so much,


Sarah Sanbar
::What does Chabad have to do with this? Stop poisoning the well. Debresser (talk) 10:02, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


] <sup>]</sup> <sub>]</sub> 00:31, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
''Perhaps you'd like to review your comment on R'] re Notability. I'm not claiming that his sefer on Shmoneh Essray puts him in the league of Rabbi Paysach Krohn.'' Chodesh Tov. ] (]) 11:25, 5 February 2019 (UTC)


: {{U|Sarabnas}} Is this still relevant, or was the August 8 deadline absolute? ] (]) 15:19, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
: @Pi314m I remember making that comment over 8 years ago. I also remember the issue. What I fail to understand is how that is connected to regarding the notability of ]?
::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)
: I stand behind my comment, that judging from his article, he is not notable. And I think the issue of his notability has nothing to do with my comment from 8 years ago.] (]) 16:40, 5 February 2019 (UTC)


== Administrators' noticeboard ==
== Pashtuns are a typical Indus Valley population and aren't close to the Ashkenazim ==


] 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 am being reasonable and basing it on thorough genome-wide analyses. They have little in common with Askhenazi Jews:
]
] (]) 23:22, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


== Third opinion == == Maimonides ==


A disagreement involving you have been added to ] ] (]) 10:50, 14 February 2019 (UTC) Hey Debresser, could you look at the proposed changes in ] and give your feedback? Thanks!] (]) 20:32, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
: Thank you for this notification. ] (]) 23:27, 14 February 2019 (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)
== Just in case you have pinging turned off ==
:: 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 ==
SherriffIsInTown is appealing the i-ban with you here: ]. --] (]) 20:25, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
: I actually have it turned on. Thanks though, I'll go there now. ] (]) 00:30, 28 February 2019 (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)
== ] ==


== Could you help file a SPI ==
Must I really do another RFC? The last one produced a fairly clear result, which you are now ignoring (despite invoking in an edit summary earlier). The fact that information is referenced does not mean it should be in the infobox - see ]. Such a bore! Please reply here, not on my page. ] (]) 18:46, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
: I see nothing in that Rfc that says that this specific information should not be in the infobox. If you understand the results of the Rfc otherwise, please explain. I am open for your comments here. ] (]) 23:29, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
::Well, it actually wasn't a formal RFC I think - I am entirely happy to have one of those; I expect you can imagine it is not likely to support your edit. Though that discussion certainly produced varying points, the main drift was, as I said in the final post in the section, was that the information in the box should be restricted to what is actually contained in the biblical account. If that is not clear to you then perhaps we should have another RFC, with specific options. That biblical information does not include her burial place. Additionally, it seems there are at least two claimants for this, according to the article (neither really supported by ], but let's ignore that). An infobox is not the place to mislead by including contested or contentious facts, especially when one possibility is included and another excluded for no reason that is explained, and when it is not key and essential information, and typically not given in infoboxes for people, even where it is certain. I hope that helps. ] (]) 15:40, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
::: You removed two things: Queen of Persia and burial in Hamadan, Iran.
::# For some reason, your post here doesn't mention the first, and I think the reason is because you recognize that your edit regarding Queen of Persia was a mistake, since the Biblical story clearly supports this, as the article states clearly in its first sentences.
::# I understand your point regarding the mix up of the Biblical and non-Biblical facts regarding the burial place. On the other hand, if there were no Biblical story, there'd be no alleged burial place, so I am afraid you'll have to admit that these two are closely related. In other words, if you hold that there is a real grave, you have to cease being opposed to writing the article as though it were some fictional story. ] (]) 17:48, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
:::::The "rfc" comments on "Queen of Persia", are pretty clear, aren't they? They are to me. You do realize that a very large proportion of Biblical scholars from a wide variety of backgrounds do indeed believe that the ] was indeed written, and intended to be understood, as precisely a work of fiction? This question is addressed in that article, but not here, which it really should be, but that's not my point now. But under the circumstances, it seems POV to insist she must have a grave, let alone that we know where it is, and that one particular competing claim is correct. It seems rather odd, given your stated occupation, that you seem to be having difficulty telling apart things that are actually ''in the bible'' and theories and traditions that aren't, but relate to biblical matters. In any case, you don't address the issue of the 2nd tradition. ] (]) 19:15, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
:Excuse for barging in here, but as far as I know there is no existing reliable historical evidence for any of the details of the biblical story in the book of Esther, not even for the basic fact that any of the characters indeed existed in actual history. I mean, I myself do not believe, from the existing historical evidence, that any of the biblical characters such as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, etc., right on down to Esther (and Jesus for that matter), really existed in historical reality. But the first ones above, which are the really important ones, are also much more difficult to knock down and erase from popular/religious belief in some type of "religious history" that never really occurred. The latter one, and the subject here, is rather elementary as far as I am concerned. That is why I also think it should not have an Infobox at all to begin with. But all that is just my own personal vote, which is already on record on the RfC there. Thank you, ] ] 19:54, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
::Well, I also supported no infobox at all, but the discussion didn't clearly go that way, so I agreed to settle for a box with just the info actually in the bible. As I've been attempting to explain above, the Book of Esther is in a rather special position, as there are many biblical scholars who broadly accept what we may call the historicity of other parts of the bible, but regard ''Esther'' as different, & written with the intention of being understood as a moral work of fiction. Debresser's argument about the grave above is therefore a POV denial of that possibility. ] (]) 20:04, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
:::I, for one, completely agree with you again. Thanks, ] ] 20:36, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
:::: Well, the issue of the Queen of Persia remains unaddressed, so that is as good as an admission of your mistake.
:::: I remain of the opinion that if we have a Biblical person, historical or not, then we can have a grave ascribed to that person. This point of view seems to me to be in complete agreement with the Rfc. To say otherwise, seems illogical. I see therefore absolutely no problem to have to location of that grave in the infobox. ] (]) 02:26, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
:::::The "queen of Persia" is not "unaddressed", you are just refusing to accept the rfc, as you are now blatently doing re the burial. "Complete agreement with the Rfc" indeed! All arguments are brushed aside; this is how you get a reputation. ] (]) 04:04, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
:::::: I am willing to listen. Please explain what is wrong with "Queen of Persia"? It is after all part of the text of the Book of Esther, that she became queen, so what do you find wrong with it? ] (]) 17:04, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
:::::::This has been explained to you several times, and was supported in the rfc (or whatever it was). I'd be willing to compromise on a "Queen of Persia, according to the biblical ''Book of Esther'' in the "occupation" box lower down (though if we do a further RFC to nail the question, others might not be), but not in the header. This was what started the whole issue. On the alleged grave, how do you justify choosing one claimed grave over the other? ] (]) 02:41, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
{{od|7}} If you ask me, the core of the problem is that from the perspective being described here, the character of Esther is treated neither as definitively real nor as definitively fictional. She is in the "gray zone"—not certainly one, and not certainly the other. Yet we only have two templates in play here: {{tl|Infobox royalty}} and {{tl|Infobox character}}. Instructions for the former strictly prohibit its use for fictional characters. The latter is clearly for the use of fictional characters. <br />
So how is this handled for others? ] and ] get {{tl|Infobox character}}. ] gets {{tl|Infobox monarch}}. ] gets {{tl|Infobox person}}. Why? Who decided? <br />
On the whole, I think the best way to handle a situation like this is to allow the infobox to contain the all facts related to the context of the notability of the character. Therefore: because the notability of the character of Esther is through the Biblical book, all facts in the Biblical book, and all facts traditionally taken as true of the Biblical character (as suported by RS, of course), are allowable.
* Where there is a choice between an unambiguous fact and an ambiguous one, choose the unambiguous one. Thus, the header preferably says "Biblical character" (certainly true), rather than "Queen of Persia" (not certainly true).
* Where an ambiguous fact is included, it's easy enough to add a tag like <small>(trad.)</small> or something similar. It isn't ''always'' necessary: If the article on Abraham had included "occupation=shepherd", would someone have cried out that it is unproved? Everyone will understand that he is described in the Bible as a shepherd. But here, one probably should, because queens of Persia have some inherent notability, unlike shepherds.
* I think I'd either use {{tl|infobox person}}, which is a pretty neutral template, or actually subst. out an infobox and put a customized one here, so that the very presence of an infobox is not taken as a claim.
I absolutely hate it when two sides need to fight to be "right" about something here, when there are perfectly reasonable middle grounds possible. ] (]) 19:06, 14 March 2019 (UTC)


: Based on the unofficial Rfc, I think that I agree with your conclusion, that we can say "Queen of Persia", as long as we call the infobox "Biblical figure". ] (]) 01:12, 15 March 2019 (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)
:], while I agree that infobox person is probably the better route, this doesn't really address the issues here. Esther (and Vashti) are not comparable to Abraham or David, of whom one would not really expect any record in the histories or surviving documents of other nations. Esther is much later, and this is not the case for her. There is also a large body of scholarly opinion who believe that the Esther story is written, and intended to be understood, as purely a work of fiction, in a way that is fundamentally different from the majority of the bible, and not the case for Abraham or David. They see it as literature rather than history. The ] would be one other example. In addition the claim "Queen of Persia" refers to a non-Israelite culture - there are several "queens of Persia", like ], of whom we have records, and there is more than a hint of cultural appropriation here. The rfc was especially concerned with this aspect. Let's be plain here: it is not just "not certainly true" that there was a historical queen of Persia called Esther, with facts matching the biblical story in some way, I do not think you will find a single RS that supports this as a historical fact, outside the Bible. This is quite different from the case with figures from Genesis, where many scholars may be happy to believe that the traditions of these figures relate to some actual historical figure, following the occupation the Bible describes.
:I can go as far as accepting "Queen of Persia, according to the ]" in the middle of the box, but not as a header. Lots of real historical figures are in the Bible, and it is vital to preserve the distinction, as the rfc confirmed. Your "best way to handle a situation like this" is odd - it goes way beyond ] in including ''everything''. Infoboxes are for giving the most important facts that are certain and unambiguous. There are several problems with the grave - it selects one claimed site, and ignores the other, for no reason that has ever been given. It takes a POV line that Esther was a real person. At least one clearly fictional character, ]' Little Nell in '']'' had a "grave" that was a profitable tourist attraction in the 19th century, but we should not be putting such stuff in an infobox. ] (]) 03:42, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
:: @Johnbod Since the title of the infobox is "Esther, biblical character", we should not repeat that in the infobox by adding "according to the biblical book of ".
:: Infoboxes are specifically for that: to gather all the details about that person. That is true whether they are real or not. So we can not leave out the burial place.
:: Even taking into consideration that there are more than one alleged burial place, this is the most well-know, and it is sourced. If there are more, when can simply add them all, or even consider adding the word "alleged". ] (]) 06:59, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
:::That is not the purpose of infoboxes ''at all''. The MOS guideline begins: "When considering any aspect of infobox design, keep in mind the purpose of an infobox: to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article (an article should remain complete with its summary infobox ignored). The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance." You can and absolutely should leave out the burial place, which in fact is rarely included in the infoboxes of dead people, even when it is certain. You are just making all this up! Both burial places are sourced (the other arguably rather better) and it would be better imo to have two than one, but much the best and most appropriate to have nothing. The primary importance is to avoid the infobox being misleading, as it certainly has been. That is why the "Queen of Persia" needs to handled especially carefully. ] (]) 15:10, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
::::{{tps}} I think I understand Debresser’s reasoning, that the applicability of “Queen of Persia” can be properly understood in the context of “biblical character”. However, in the case of an infobox, which is not only a feature of the article but is designed to be treated as a database entry by external users, the context doesn’t necessarily get preserved. IMO this is ample reason to eschew anything that’s at all ambiguous, nuanced, or context-dependent in infoboxes.—]]] 20:44, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
::::: For compromise's sake (and only for that reason as far as I am concerned), and in view of Odysseus1479's argument that context might get lost, what about "Biblical Queen of Persia"? That should satisfy all. ] (]) 16:51, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
:::::::And the graves? ] (]) 01:31, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
:::::::: What about them? They stay. I don't think "biblical graves" is an option here. :) ] (]) 09:15, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
::::::::::There's only one of them in the box, which is part of the problem. But to be clear, none should be there, for the reasons given above. ] (]) 10:59, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
::::::::::: By the way, I see no real reason why burial places are not included in infoboxes of dead people, but since in Judaism burial places are often places of pilgrimage, that is good reason to make sure to have them, even if general articles don't.
::::::::::: If we have more than one, we could have both and add "alleged" after both of them. I personally know only of Hamadan. ] (]) 11:56, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
:::::::::::: WRT burial places, easy enough to say "Disputed", with a link to the spot in the page where it is discussed. ] (]) 13:40, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
::::::::::::: I thought of that option as well. But for that we need that a section of the article actually discuss several burial places. ] (]) 19:09, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
::::::::::::::This is why I will second Johnbod's suggestion that this Infobox should not contain any grave information. A piece of agreed disputed data has no place in an Infobox to begin with. I will also reiterate once again my original position that a Biblical character of dubious existence in real historical annals should not have an Infox at all to begin with. But barred that, disputed information has no place whatsoever in any Infobox, in my view. Thank you, ] ] 19:39, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
::::::::::::::: @Warshy It is the nature of history to give rise to lack of information. That is called "historical incompleteness". If there are a few reliably sourced claimants for a field in an infobox, I see no reason why they shouldn't be mentioned. I also had a look at ] and ], and your point of view is not part of that guideline and help page. ] (]) 20:06, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
::::::::::::::: Bottom line, I am fine with not mentioning the burial place in the infobox in this case. ] (]) 21:45, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
== Tzniut ==


Can you clear up the descriptions of R' Weinberg and/or R' Bigman's positions following ? ] (]) 22:07, 19 March 2019 (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
: @Ar2332 I'd be happy to, but I don't understand what you mean. ] (]) 23:45, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
::The article currently says "Yehiel Yaakov Weinberg Rabbi David Bigman of Yeshivat Ma'ale Gilboa..." - did you mean to delete the R Weinberg reference? Currently it's not a grammatical sentence. ] (]) 08:27, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
:: Thanks. Resolved. ] (]) 19:28, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=One_of_Us_(2017_film)&diff=prev&oldid=1037264488 ] (]) 01:52, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
==Talkback==
: 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)
{{talkback|Ibadibam|Bad call|ts=03:50, 24 March 2019 (UTC)}}
] (]) 03:50, 24 March 2019 (UTC)


Not my cup of cake. ] (]) 22:51, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
== Do not restore poorly-sourced content. ==


: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)
This is a ], not a ]. <span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">] {] · ] · ] · ]}</span> 21:04, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
: I wasn't familiar with the concept. Thanks, and sorry for the trouble. ] (]) 23:01, 26 March 2019 (UTC) :: True as well. ] (]) 15:21, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
:: No worries. That's part of the pitfalls of predatory publishing. They're set up to look like legitimate peer-reviewed publications, but aren't really. Now that doesn't mean that " crime rates decreased in ] during Ramadan, and that the decrease was ]" isn't the case. It may well be. But that journal is not credible for that claim, and a better source is needed for Misplaced Pages to say this. <span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">] {] · ] · ] · ]}</span> 23:30, 26 March 2019 (UTC)


== Congratulations == == 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 {{u|IZAK}} because page protection.] (]) 21:17, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
{| style="border: 3px solid {{{border|gold}}}; background-color: #000000;"
: Nope. Not interested. ] (]) 22:52, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
|rowspan="2" valign="top" | ]

|rowspan="2" |
== Query ==
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; height: 1.1em;" |<font color="gold">'''100000 Edits'''

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 !
: 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)
:: This user is globally banned; see ]. <b>] ]</b> 14:37, 27 August 2021 (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 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)

== Are you a moderator ? ==

are you a moderator ?

if so can you please look over the article ]

"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. ] (]) 20:47, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

== Oolite ==
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-->

== ] has been nominated for discussion ==

<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)
: Thanks for the notice. ] (]) 06:17, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

== ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message ==

<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
<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.

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>
</td></tr>
</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==
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 ==

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)
: 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 ==

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)

: 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)

== Nomination for deletion of ] ==
]] has been ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> ] (]) 11:43, 7 February 2022 (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)

== Levantine Arabic FAC ==

Hi Debresser,
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)

: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 ==

Please see ]. ] (]) 14:37, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
: 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)

== ] ==

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)

: 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)
::Nice dodge. —] ] 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?] (]) 23:06, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
: 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! ==

{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Editor's Barnstar'''
|- |-
|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)
|style="vertical-align: top; border-top: 1px solid gray;" |<font color="gold"> Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that only 542 editors have been able to accomplish. The Misplaced Pages Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work!
<font color="black">
|} |}
-- ] (]) 13:04, 28 March 2019 (UTC)


: Thank you. ] (]) 13:36, 28 March 2019 (UTC) : {{Ping|Viriditas}} Are you sure you meant to give this barnstar to ''me''? ] (]) 16:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
:: ] (]) 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 ==

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)
: 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 ==

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>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 09:15, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

== Arbitration election RfC ==

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

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

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)
: 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)

== ArbCom 2022 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; ">
<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.

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>

</div>
</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 ==

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)
: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)
::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)
:: 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)

== 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 ], 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)
: 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)

== 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 ''']'''<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)
: 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 ] ==
]] has been ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> ] (]) 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. - ] (]) 05:37, 5 March 2023 (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 ==

Hi ]. Pleased to meet you.

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

: I see that you are referring to ].
: 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)

== 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 ], 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.

I would also appreciate your consideration of my ] for the ] page. Thank you very much! ] (]) 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. ] (]) 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 ] is in. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 19:22, 8 October 2023 (UTC)</small>
: 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)

== ] ==

Re , "5% newer based on a chronological epoch set by a different religion" isn't a strong claim? :) ] (]) 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. ] (]) 17:58, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
:: Lame math joke? 21 vs 20 is 5% more. ] (]) 18:32, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
::: Okay. ] (]) 18:36, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

== 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; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px; max-width: 100px">]</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|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.

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>

</div>
</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 ==
<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 -->

=== Unblock request ===

{{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)}}

: 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. ] (]) 13:00, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

== 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)

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)

Remove ] from the "See also" list at ], as it is already linked in the article proper. ] (]) 21:34, 30 April 2024 (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)

mixed up the order of Short description and Hatnote. ] (]) 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 ], 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)

"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)

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 ==

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 ''''''.

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 ] and view its ] .

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


Kind Regards,
מזל טוב!--] (]) 22:21, 28 March 2019 (UTC)


]
== Please respect the RfC ==


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 19:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
Your repeated attempts to circumvent the consensus process at ] are disruptive to the good-faith efforts by myself and our fellow editors to reach a solution. I would prefer we managed on our own to desist from edit warring but if you remove the image in question again I will seek administrator intervention to determine and enforce the preexisting consensus. Best, ] (]) 00:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
<!-- 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 -->
: My argument is solid. Nothing to do with the Rfc. ] (]) 13:36, 29 March 2019 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==
== Unconstructive question ==


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
How many times were you banned for undermining wikipedia by editing with an extreme bias and being unable to work with other editors? Does this edit count also include the other accounts you would use when this one was blocked all those times? ] (]) 17:41, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
: For editing with bias, never. For being unable to work with other editors, never. For disagreeing with other editors, that has happened, and as often as not those blocks have been unjustified. ] (]) 19:22, 30 March 2019 (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.
== RE ==
RE - I would avoid filing AE (on this specifically) as I don't quite see how you tie this into ARBPIA. The community also has a complex relationship with the F word. ] (]) 12:39, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
: right. Based on my experience, he's baiting you. You will get blocked for filing a frivolous request. See here where he did the same to me,
,
] ] <sup>]</sup> 12:45, 3 April 2019 (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>
I agree with Icewhiz that, while the TP comments are some way from ideal, they would not be within the scope of ARBPIA. Filing at AE would therefore not get you far. AN or ANI would be the only places you could file this, but I don't recommend it; I don't think you will achieve anything. ] (]) 13:34, 3 April 2019 (UTC)


</div>
: I think there is something really wrong with a system that lets editor badmouth other editors and bully them like that. Since this is something Nishidani does regularly, I think the community should outcast him, read: block him. ] (]) 17:17, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
</div>
: It was as a matter of a fact Sandstein who said he might do the right thing and do something about this in the future. ] (]) 17:18, 3 April 2019 (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 -->
:: There was a RfC a while back on whether the f word was incivil. I do not remember how it closed - but it was close either way. You are unlikely to get an established editor sanctioned for f-word use by itself - particularly not in AN/ANI.] (]) 17:32, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Yes, of course, editors should never use . <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 17:26, 3 April 2019 (UTC)</small>
::I just noticed this, and while, Debresser, I refrain from visiting your page as per your request, I believe, I would appreciate it if you avoid slinging wild ] violations in my direction ('badmouth'/'bully' etc., here, without even the courtesy of a notification. I do neither. Saying 'for fuck's sake' is an expression of exasperation, (at the general failure of most editors to research the topic and engage in close source scrutiny, as opposed to reverting people who do). Rather than target editors, which is personalizing matters, one does well on the relevant page to check sources - several are screwed up (i.e. the ] page without controlling the sources and summarizing their content correctly). If the consensus is my work in this direction is not desired on the page, fine. But that does not absolve editors of the duty to ensure by close quality control that the material I am implicitly thought not to be an appropriate editor to fix, be fixed. Not fixing it, means the remaining editors cannot see what is obviously wrong with the text. So, drop it. I too dislike editing in hostile environments, but focus on the factual record, build articles and explain with some care for precision to editors who dislike my edits, why I think the sources I adduce are cogent. Nothing more, nothing less. ] (]) 17:45, 3 April 2019 (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)