User talk:Chesdovi

Mass changes at Israeli settlement articles

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

hello

Hello, Chesdovi. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Good Article promotion

	Congratulations!
	Thanks for all the work you did in making Tefillin a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk)

Notification

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Chesdovi_and_Palestinian_edits regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Chesdovi! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Notes

Balady citron, New Jewish Cemetery, Kraków, Moshe Zvi Segal, Abraham Sternhartz, Eliyahu Chaim Rosen, Shlomo Yosef Zevin

Orphaned non-free image File:Aharon Kotler.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Aharon Kotler.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:03, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Joseph Karo

It's frankly astonishing that your false edits to the lede to an important page like Joseph Karo remained up for 12 years. I am not surprised to find you blocked. Please refrain from editing the page again. GordonGlottal (talk) 18:38, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

October 2021

To enforce an arbitration decision and for You are topic banned from zionism, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 6m. 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 [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. 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. 

---

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" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

• Per this thread you acknowledge editing Elazer Shach is a tban vio as you asked for it to be waived to allow you to edit it. You were then warned by me that the previous edits were vios but continue to edit it after being told I would not chance your tbans. You then compound it, you make an edit to a section on zionism in your sandbox. I can't really see that as anything other than a breaching experiment so its time for more reflection on your part about how you can continue to edit without breaching your various tbans Spartaz ^Humbug! 10:06, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
  • No @Spartaz:, you misunderstand. Other admins have previously confirmed pages like ES (like DBG) are not under IP tban. The same would apply to ES viz-a-viz zionism. I therefore did not comprehend your comment "I can't see how your existing edits to this article, which appears to be about a renowned antizionist is not already either a tban vio in some way" and glossed over it. (That's why El C was at pains to explain how tban was violated at DBG). I asked for my zio-ban to be lifted, not in order to edit on that page, but to add material relating to Zionism. I had been adding it to Sandbox unaware that doing so constituted a vio of the ban.

If I recall correctly, you banned me from Zionism for what was originally believed a vio of the a IP conflict tban. As I had been lead to believe, and corroborated by the earlier involved Admin Ed, adding material about 4th cent. P rabbis should not have been considered a violation. You can't expect editors to adhere to tbans if there is no consensus what constitutes a violation! I think you will agree it's unfair to be told one thing by one Admin and then be retrospectively blocked by another. I think you added Zionism for my adding a slew of unthoughtful zio-cats. All over the top if you ask me. Yet you refused to lift it from just one page? Surely one shows improvement by editing in the specific area of contention. I am at odds to understand how my additions to ES on the subject will be disrupt the project. You can see how much effort I expended and how restrained I was just to get the lead expanded. Chesdovi (talk) 02:16, 29 December 2021 (UTC)