User talk:Dag21902190

May 2024

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Martin Buber have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see the Introduction to Wikipedia, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Martin Buber was changed by Dag21902190 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.887931 on 2024-05-22T15:57:27+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 15:57, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Photos

Hi, I noticed you’ve rapidly made a large number of edits changing entry infobox photos. You have not given a reason for the changes and the ones I have checked have not seemed constructive, for example removals of high-quality official photos ([1], [2]). These seem like arbitrary changes. Please slow down and be more judicious to make sure edits are for the sake of improving the entry. Innisfree987 (talk) 09:23, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your image of Garri Kasparov is a case in point. However, it could be added into his article at the right place (early 1980s), with the appropriate alt text, etc. Billsmith60 (talk) 10:15, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Bill! Since the earlier comment, I’ve been extra judicious about which photos to choose. Thanks for your input! Dag21902190 (talk) 13:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024 images again

Hey, Dag, please don't replace infobox photos without at minimum an explanation in the edit summary. I've reverted your edit to Gloria Steinem, which replaced a recent photo with one 50 years old. Valereee (talk) 18:32, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

This was not a typo fix. Please explain. Valereee (talk) 18:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I should have said "added minor content". Should I provide in-depth explanations for each edit? Best regards. Dag21902190 (talk) 18:56, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, first, "to an ultra-Orthodox family" is not minor content. The immediately following source mentions Corfu once and doesn't seem to mention his family's religion, so you've also added unsourced content.

And yes, in many cases the edit summary is as important as the edit. Using an accurate edit summary for every edit is best-practices. Using disingenuous edit summaries like this one are absolutely not okay. Valereee (talk) 19:05, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are clearly irrational and should have no control over banning people. He was born into an ultra-orthodox family, that is a well-known fact. Dag21902190 (talk) 19:17, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it's a well-known fact, it should be easy to find a source. Valereee (talk) 19:25, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will you allow me to cite it? Keep an eye on my page, but allow me a chance to show you. Dag21902190 (talk) 19:27, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot that I can do to help contribute. Please let me know. Dag21902190 (talk) 19:28, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024 block

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces ((Article)) for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Valereee (talk) 18:36, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is extremely disingenuous of you. Dag21902190 (talk) 19:02, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry you feel that way. I am happy to lift the block if you'll start responding to concerns expressed here on your user page and start using accurate edit summaries. Valereee (talk) 19:32, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. I'll make sure that I operate within the guidelines of Wikipedia. I appreciate it Valeree. Looking forward to helping out. Dag21902190 (talk) 19:36, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've unblocked. Just FTR, refactoring other editors' comments, including the section heads they put in place to describe a particular issue, is generally frowned on, per WP:TPO. Valereee (talk) 19:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and got it. Dag21902190 (talk) 19:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Valereee their edit summaries at Shadia Abu Ghazaleh‎ aren't vague but the OR and lack of specificity isn't satisfactory. Doug Weller talk 08:57, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Please particularly note the restriction until your account has been active for 30 days and 500 edits. Thank you. Innisfree987 (talk) 23:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning concerning your edits when you reached Extended confirmed

You have repeatedly called Shadia Abu Ghazaleh‎ a terrorist in Wikipedia's voice despite being reverted - I see the last edit summary states "Blatant POV, see also MOS:LABEL. As I am involved, I cannot sanction you, but I will ask for sanctions if you continue. Doug Weller talk 08:54, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pioneers of Israel has been nominated for deletion

Category:Pioneers of Israel has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it 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. Remsense诉 03:14, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Members of the Fourth Aliyah has been nominated for merging

Category:Members of the Fourth Aliyah has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it 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. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:46, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Behavior at CfD

Hi Dag21902190. I just wanted to let you know that your behavior at various debates categories for discussion are veering into personal remarks. Remarks like you are flexing your ignorance of Israeli history or insinuating that people have an ulterior motive for wanting to merge a category (What’s the real reason for you to want to delete my work?) is not okay, no matter how upset you might be. I have had my own work deleted before, so I know how it feels. But we are just trying to make Wikipedia the best it can be, and accusing long-term editors of editing in bad faith is not going to get you too far. Let me know if you have any questions, House Blaster (talk · he/they) 23:44, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Hi, Dag. After seeing HouseBlaster's post above, I took a look for myself and was fairly appalled. Here, you say "I hate to break it to you, but you sound like an anti-Israel shill". Here, it's "Why are you misleading people? … What’s the real reason for you to want to delete my work?" And here, "Denying the benefits of a category like this is just blatant anti-Israel bias". HouseBlaster has warned you gently, Dag. I'm warning you sharply: any more such attacks and you will be blocked. Please read Wikipedia:Assume good faith, an extremely important guideline for a user-generated encyclopedia.

Another point: thank you for this removal of promotional text (which you had yourself originally added) from Category:Pioneers of Israel. However, the remaining text is also far too promotional: "Their efforts not only laid the foundation for a Jewish homeland but also fostered a society built on innovation, resilience, and cultural diversity. Their enduring legacy continues to shape Israel's national identity." It's like reading an advertisement. Since the category is being considered for deletion, I won't insist on removing your nationalist promotion at this point, but will wait and see how that plays out. However... please Dag, consider that this is an encyclopedia, and try to contribute neutrally. Bishonen | tålk 12:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Bishonen,

I'm glad to hear you were appalled. Thanks for threatening to block me and exerting your authority. It doesn’t make my statements any less true, though. Since joining Wikipedia, I’ve faced constant attacks when editing anything related to the Israel-Palestine conflict. It seems like the moderators for this topic are heavily biased towards the Palestinian side. How does this comply with Wikipedia’s neutral guidelines? I’d be shocked if you weren’t interested in looking into that. Are you guys not concerned? If you consider the context of our discussions, you might understand why my responses come across as rude. Dag21902190 (talk) 14:18, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the Wikipedia:Assume Good Faith guideline; it's an excellent principle. Thanks for sending it. I had never seen it. However, it's disheartening to see it often ignored, with many acting in bad faith. My frustration during the discussion stemmed from these experiences. It's evident that some editors, including those in positions of authority, are not adhering to this standard. They are abusing their positions of authority. Dag21902190 (talk) 14:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll just explain the administrator system on Wikipedia: there are no moderators for specific topic areas. All admins are generalists, see WP:ADMIN (if you care). For my part, the Arab–Israeli conflict is not an area that I edit, and I very rarely "admin" in it either. I do recognize nationalist promotion when I see it, though; it's a major problem on Wikipedia, by no means only in the Arab-Israeli area, but concerning nations all over the globe. I'm sorry you had no comment on my second paragraph above — did you think you wrote neutrally in the category description that I quote? Bishonen | tålk 15:59, 8 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

“Their efforts not only laid the foundation for a Jewish homeland but also fostered a society built on innovation, resilience, and cultural diversity. Their enduring legacy continues to shape Israel's national identity”

Let’s walk through it.

1. Did their efforts not lay the foundation for a Jewish homeland?

2. Is their society not one that is built on innovation? (Israel is known as the “Startup Nation” due to its high number of startups per capita. It has approximately one startup for every 1,400 people.)

3. Is it not a resilient nation? (The early settlers (which the category is about) were filled with Holocaust survivors and people fleeing Pogroms. Since the establishment of the nation, 1948 Arab-Israeli War, Suez Crisis (1956), Six-Day War (1967), War of Attrition (1967-1970), Yom Kippur War (1973), 1982 Lebanon War (1982), First Intifada (1987-1993), Second Intifada (2000-2005), 2006 Lebanon War (2006), Gaza War (2008-2009), Operation Pillar of Defense (2012), Operation Protective Edge (2014), Operation Guardian of the Walls (2021), and the most recent infiltration which kicked off the Israel-Hamas War (2023-)). I’d say the legacy of resilience has continued. That is not nationalistic.

4. Is it not a nation built on cultural diversity? (Over 20% of the country is Arab, Jews came from Eastern Europe, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, the US, Canada, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, the former Soviet Union, Ethiopia (Beta Israel), India (Bene Israel, Cochin Jews), and many other areas. Seems like a pretty rich tapestry that screams “cultural diversity”.

How else could I have phrased it? I’m open to suggestions. But why is what I wrote nationalistic? Dag21902190 (talk) 02:24, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I delete advertising on Wikipedia every day. Here's a recent sample: X Hospital has emerged as a prominent beacon of excellence in Y's healthcare landscape, offering cutting-edge medical services and compassionate care to patients from all walks of life. With a reputation for world-class facilities, skilled medical professionals, and advanced technological infrastructure, X Hospital has set a new standard for healthcare delivery in the country. It's unusual that the creator comes back combatively with something like "Are you saying X hospital is not a prominent beacon of excellence in Y's healthcare landscape? Does it not offer cutting-edge medical services and compassionate care to patients from all walks of life? It's widely known as 'the World-Class Facilities Hospital'!" Et cetera. You're one of a kind. Yes, writing advertising copy about one's homeland is nationalistic (as well as irrelevant to the category where it was placed). I'm glad to see you removed some more of it.[3] Bishonen | tålk 07:14, 9 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Please refrain from making personal attacks, such as sarcastically stating "you're one of a kind." For clarity, I am American and have never lived in Israel. My intention was to highlight the enduring legacy of the original settlers, who have contributed significantly across various fields such as science, politics, business, agriculture, and defense. While one might argue that this information could be omitted, suggesting that it is merely an advertisement for my homeland is unfounded and unfair. Dag21902190 (talk) 07:22, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify the above, you will be indefinitely blocked if there is any repeat of comments similar to those mentioned in the original post. People are welcome to battle and abuse each other at Twitter and lots of other places. However, that is not compatible with how Wikipedia operates. Who is right or wrong is not relevant. The rule here is to focus on content and to not comment on contributors except at noticeboards for that purpose, such as WP:ANI. Johnuniq (talk) 03:16, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really starting to get why Larry Sanger lost hope in this platform. It has so much potential for good, but the admin process has been taken over by the most extreme voices on each issue. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but there should be safeguards to stop people from ganging up, gaslighting, and twisting the narrative of a whole situation or discussion. Can't you see how easy it is to target a single editor? Dag21902190 (talk) 12:57, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without evidence of permission, as you did at Vladimir Tiomkin. Please take this opportunity to ensure that you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. DanCherek (talk) 04:11, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an representative example of the text that I removed from the article, following previous warnings you received about copyright violations.

Source:

In 1891 he was appointed the representative of the *Odessa Committee of Ḥovevei Zion in Ereẓ Israel, and he became head of the executive committee of the Russian Ḥovevei Zion in Jaffa. He initiated land purchases in Ereẓ Israel, but his plans were soon foiled by land speculations and the financial losses incurred by many investors.

Your edit:

In 1891, Tiomkin was appointed as the representative of the Odessa Committee of Hovevei Zion in Erez Israel, and he became head of the executive committee of the Russian Hovevei Zion in Jaffa. He initiated land purchases in Erev Israel, but his plans were soon foiled by land speculations and the financial losses incurred by many investors.

DanCherek (talk) 04:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Dag21902190 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here Dag21902190 (talk) 12:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Based on your comments below, I don't think it would be appropriate to unblock you without at least a clear commitment to refraining from any use of AI in the future. Yamla (talk) 12:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Hi Yamla, This incident was an isolated mistake, and I assure you it will not happen again. I am making a clear and firm commitment to refrain from using any AI tools in the future. All my contributions will be entirely my own work. I humbly request an opportunity to demonstrate my dedication to the community and rectify this situation. Dag21902190 Hi Derek,

I'm surprised the wording wasn't changed at all since I asked an AI assistant to summarize the content. I didn't check as thoroughly as I usually do, which likely caused this oversight.

Could you review all the positive contributions I've made on this platform? I've been working diligently to comply with the rules and believe my efforts have been beneficial for Wikipedia. I focus on Jewish history, a niche area, and I think my work has been a net positive for the community.

Please consider giving me another chance. This was an unusual mistake, and I now understand the rules against using AI. I promise not to use such tools again and will make sure all my work is my own. Dag21902190 (talk) 12:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dag21902190, you are not permitted to modify declined unblock requests for your currently active block. You are free to make a new unblock request and a different admin will review it. --Yamla (talk) 14:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It told me that was the only way I could reply. My bad, okay. Dag21902190 (talk) 14:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who's "Derek"? Anyways, I've unblocked you given your commitments above to avoid copyright violations and AI tools in the future. I'm glad this finally got your attention as compared to the first two instances back in May. Please be more careful in the future; historically, editors have found that a second block for copyright violations is far harder to successfully appeal. DanCherek (talk) 04:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Dan. I appreciate the warning as well. Will be more stringent going forward. Dag21902190 (talk) 16:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Isaac halevi portrait.png

I reverted your changes to File:Isaac halevi portrait.png. These were not helpful changes and it's unclear what you thought you were trying to achieve. Please do not make such edits again. --Yamla (talk) 20:41, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yamla, I am attempting to add him to the category "images of famous rabbis". Would you like to do it? Best regards. Dag21902190 (talk) 20:43, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No such category exists on this project, nor has it ever existed on this project. --Yamla (talk) 20:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, I'm trying to add the file to a specific category of media files. This is the only issue I've encountered so far; it works perfectly for all other images. Could you help me identify the problem? Dag21902190 (talk) 20:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No such category exists on this project. --Yamla (talk) 20:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I should add... you have not successfully added this category to any images on en.wikipedia.org. If you think you have, you are either confused about what project you were working on or are confused about what you did on this project. --Yamla (talk) 20:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]