User talk:Avner Kushner

Welcome!

Hello, Avner Kushner, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Gaza Strip does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:19, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 2015

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Israel are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:27, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Avner Kushner, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Avner Kushner! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Rosiestep (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:21, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gaza Strip

The source you used, "Why does Israel supply Gaza with electricity and cement?", is an opinion piece, not a news article. I reverted your changes to Gaza Strip because, per WP:NEWSORG, a section of Wikipedia's guideline concerning reliable sources, opinion pieces are not considered reliable sources for statements of fact. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 02:49, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1RR

You have broken the 1RR rule on Gaza Strip: please self-revert, or you will be reported, Huldra (talk) 21:56, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I second what Huldra said. Administrators don't take lightly edit-warring and 1RR/3RR violations. — MShabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 22:10, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I'm not a Pakistani Muslim, not that there's anything wrong with that. — MShabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 22:10, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

After* I warned you here, you go arguing on the talk-page, instead of reverting. This makes me believe that you have no intention of reverting. (Please prove me wrong!). I will therefor report you.Huldra (talk) 22:23, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done, Huldra (talk) 22:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notification

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Johnuniq (talk) 02:38, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 2015

To enforce an arbitration decision and for bright line violation of 1RR on Gaza Strip, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours. 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. Philg88 ^♦talk 05:38, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted a procedure instructing administrators as follows: "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."

Indefblocked

Looking through your edit history, it's clear that you're here to pursue an aggressive and tendentious agenda in relation to Israel/Palestine topics. You are clearly not a new user, as your familiarity with Wikipedia demonstrates, and I therefore suspect you to be the reincarnation of a previously blocked/banned user. That said, it is not the reason for my blocking you indefinitely, I have done so because you are self-evidently not here to build an encyclopedia, but to pursue an agenda in breach of wikipedia behavioural and neutrality guidelines. If you wish to appeal against this block, you may do so by using the template {{unblock}}, but I suspect you know that already. WJBscribe (talk) 16:19, 18 August 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

This block is outrageous. I was blocked, by user WJBscribe, who recently restored talkpage access of blocked user Malik Shabazz. I was blocked because I asked user Malik Shabazz why he reverted my edit at Gaza Strip (film), here.--Avner Kushner (talk) 16:28, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No indication that the editor understands why their behavior is unacceptable. Philg88 ^♦talk 16:31, 18 August 2015 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I was blocked for doing nothing other than asking a legitimate question. Instead of accusing me, you should accuse yourself of not assuming goodfaith. There are many editors who pursed a lot more "aggressive and tendentious" tendencies towards me and in general. Antisemitism does exist in Wikipedia. --Avner Kushner (talk) 16:40, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Once again, your unblock request does not address the reasons for you being blocked. You were not blocked for asking a legitimate question, and focusing on that will not result in an unblock. You are clearly not a new user and the creation of a new account for engaging in disruption in sensitive areas is certainly grounds for a block. Chillum 16:50, 18 August 2015 (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.