User talk:Sandstein

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless you request otherwise. Please read the following helpful hints, as well as our talk page guidelines before posting:

• Please add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. This will create an identifying signature and timestamp.

• Do you have a question about arbitration enforcement? Please read my FAQ at User:Sandstein/AE.

• If you're here to inform me of a mistake I made while on administrative duty, please indicate which article is concerned by enclosing the title of the article in two sets of square brackets: [[example article]].

• If you are looking for my talk page's previous contents, they are in the archives.

Start a new talk topic

Please amend your closure

Please amend your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greenwald Rabbinical family. The consensus was not "delete", rather "merge and delete". All three commenting editors mention the merge part. Debresser (talk) 17:02, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

"Merge and delete" is not possible because of our attribution rules. Sandstein 17:06, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Please explain. I have seen many merge and delete cases. Debresser (talk) 23:12, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Merge and delete. Sandstein 23:16, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

My guess is that only one editor made any serious contribution to that article, so Wikipedia:Merge_and_delete#Record_authorship_and_delete_history would be easily achievable. Debresser (talk) 11:23, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes, all content was by תנא קמא. If you want to merge this content, I've pasted it at https://pastebin.com/W9jSFSUR, where it will expire in one week. Sandstein 11:29, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll look at it tomorrow. Shabbat shalom. Debresser (talk) 14:50, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Done. Thank you again. Debresser (talk) 19:07, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

LumaNatic

Hey Sandstein, last month you closed a discussion topic banning LumaNatic from "anything to do with race, racism, racial history and politics, slavery, or white supremacy, all very broadly construed." They've since made edits in violation of this topic ban [1] [2]. (Notably, they also haven't made any edits to articles they aren't topic banned from.) Please do the needful. Natureium (talk) 16:20, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

@LumaNatic: Please respond promptly to the above. Sandstein 16:58, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

@LumaNatic: Because you have not responded or otherwise edited since, I am blocking you for a week in enforcement of your topic ban. Sandstein 10:06, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

A request

Hello! Would you mind giving a shot to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cody Claver and give it a one relist at least. I feel the discussion that was ongoing there is very important Wikipedia wise, and maybe we could get a clearer consensus thanks to it? If it ends up in a "no consensus" situation again, I will have no complaints of course. Regards,Jovanmilic97 (talk) 14:20, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

No. Relists occur if there has been too little discussion to assess consensus. Here we had a lot of discussion, even though it was inconclusive. Sandstein 15:23, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

That was a succinct and good close:-) ∯WBG^converse 15:36, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Aprimo DRV

At Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2019 February 6 you indicated you did not not understand what the DRV was about. The DRV was about whether CSD G6 was properly applied and executed in the 05:01 01 February 2019 UTC deletion of the Aprimo incarnation of per guidelines and policies. The objective of DRV is for that decision to be endorsed or overturned, and if overturned to indicate what action is required … is none. If you do not fully understand which you indicated you did not the appropriate option is to relist for clarification or leave for another person to close. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:21, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Then you should have been clearer about what, exactly, you want to happen in your DRV request. I do not have anything to add to my closure. Sandstein 10:05, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

I apologise for my failure to totally analyze the problem in my initial submission. A concise issue of the exact problem only became clear to me during the discussion with help from others. Thankyou for replying.Djm-leighpark (talk) 10:26, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

פֿינצטערניש TBAN

You TBANed @פֿינצטערניש: from ARBPIA. It would seem to me that - 17:37, 29 January 2019 and 13:58, 14 February 2019 would fall within the scope of the TBAN. Icewhiz (talk) 14:12, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Neither of those edits mention the Arab-Israeli conflict, nor does the topic have anything to do with the Arab-Israeli conflict. פֿינצטערניש (talk) 14:35, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Sorry; I thought the two edits you were referring to were both on Category talk:Anti-Zionism. You are right that my edit to the Khazars page mentioned the Arab-Israeli conflict. I should not have mentioned it, but I made a mistake in my original attempt to discuss the Khazar conflict and overreached. פֿינצטערניש (talk) 14:39, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

פֿינצטערניש, these are indeed topic ban violations. I will not take action here in view of your statement above, but please take care not to violate your topic ban again. Sandstein 14:58, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello

Do you know I get along with most of the users on Wikipedia including the Hungarian nationalistics? And it's very difficult to work with them, they are much more like warriors, they kinda always want to have the last word. And the Hungarian history is against the Trianon and the international regulations. Nevertheless, I reached consensuses with Borsoka and more. And one Danish user on the handball section Cotillards always wants to have the last word. And I even let him to have the last word, although he removed some of my work which was objective, not subjective like she said. And very similar to the articles of Real Madrid, Barcelona, Man United etc.

Normally I don't even deserve a minimum TBAN. Some hours for my behaviour maybe, but you can't say I am really bannable. Because after, it will open other boxes of possible exclusions. Even the absolute exclusion.

When I arrived on Wikipedia, the Romanian page was full of mockeries. Now what do you think? Do you think there are some businessmen who would read it on Wikipedia or not, when they type Romania? A small armada of users even mocked us by creating pages with the Romanian towns by Roma populations (which was of course eventually deleted). We want to get along with everyone, but understand we are more than you in an area of opression. And you are really understimating the Romanians, and me. I don't like the situation, but it's the result of the stupid nationalism in Hungary, Ukraine or Russia. In Germany, Romania, we talk about patriotism. Christina (talk) 19:22, 15 February 2019 (UTC)