User talk:Dpb126948

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Huldra (talk) 21:30, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

Please refrain from attempting to make unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been disallowed by an edit filter. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. HalvesTime (talk) 02:24, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits

Per the blue notice higher on this page, you are not permitted to edit material related to the Arab-Israeli conflict until you have 30 days tenure and 500 edits. Even then, disruptive edits like most of those you have made so far will also not be allowed. You will be reported and probably blocked if you continue. Zero^talk 11:14, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Hello, I'm Adakiko. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Mevo Hama seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Adakiko (talk) 11:32, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain why exactly my edit isn’t neutral?

Also, how is adding a disclaimer onto every page about Israeli towns in the Golan that the “international community” doesn’t recognize the Golan Heights as legitimate at all neutral or even relevant to the topic? Which “international community”?

There are plenty of land disputes all over the world, yet there aren’t consistent disclaimers on every individual town/city that exist within them as there are for every Israeli town in the Golan on Wikipedia. How exactly is this neutral? Dpb126948 (talk) 11:54, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Mevo Hama. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Adakiko (talk) 12:08, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did with this edit to HaGoshrim. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Adakiko (talk) 12:12, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You didn’t answer any of my questions. Does it feel good knowing that you can’t even use basic facts or logic to justify your bias? Dpb126948 (talk) 12:20, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The sources are in conflict with your edits. Adakiko (talk) 12:21, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Which sources? You still haven’t answered as to which “international community” exactly is being referenced in the disclaimer on every Israeli town in the Golan Heights. Dpb126948 (talk) 12:22, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Antizionist political bias" is a very serious charge that you should not make without hard evidence. Articles summarize what independent reliable sources say about the topic, not our personal views or those of the Israeli government. I suggest before you make the wholesale change you are attempting to make, that you first discuss on the article talk page(or a more general forum like the village pump). If you don't agree with what sources say, take that up with them, not us. If you are unable to collaborate on this issue, and continue to toss around accusations, I or another administrator will impose restrictions on you per the notice at the top. This is your only warning. 331dot (talk) 14:01, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Who is “we”? Why are you answering for Adakiko? Why are neither of you able to answer any of my questions? Dpb126948 (talk) 14:03, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't used "we" so I don't know what you mean. I'm not answering for anyone other than myself and have no position in your dispute, just how you are going about it. The discretionary sanctions regime described above allows me to impose sanction on you in the topic area specified if you do not strictly follow policies.. 331dot (talk) 14:07, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making this type of change in many articles while other editors are objecting and reverting you. This can be calmly discussed in a central venue. —Alalch E. 14:11, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For shits and giggles, can you at least answer my original questions?

1. How is my editing “not neutral”?

2. How is adding a disclaimer onto every page about Israeli towns in the Golan that the “international community” doesn’t recognize the Golan Heights as legitimate at all neutral or even relevant to the topic? Which “international community”?

3. There are plenty of land disputes all over the world, yet there aren’t consistent disclaimers on every individual town/city that exist within them as there are for every Israeli town in the Golan on Wikipedia. How exactly is this neutral?

If you answer my questions I’ll stop. Dpb126948 (talk) 14:12, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How is it not relevant to the topic? It helps readers understand an important and widely discussed aspect of the topic. It is not a disclaimer, it is information. —Alalch E. 14:13, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You do not yet have 500 edits, so you should not be editing related to Israeli territorial claims at all(as that's part of the Arab/Israeli conflict). You will stop or I will place a block on you. 331dot (talk) 14:20, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It’s not relevant because

1. It is in fact a disclaimer because of how it’s copied identically onto the Wikipedia page of every Israeli town in the Golan. There’s clearly an effort being pushed to add a politically biased label onto sovereign Israeli towns in the Golan.

2. The disclaimer is about the greater Israeli-Syrian war of 1967, not at all relevant to the individual towns themselves most of which were established after the 1967 war. You don’t see disclaimers about San Diego being an “American occupied territory of Mexico from the Mexican-American war”.

3. Land disputes exist all over the world, yet you don’t see disclaimers like this being copied-pasted onto every individual town/city’s Wikipedia pages about every individual conflict. Why does Israel get so much unbalanced attention?

4. It doesn’t help readers at all, because of the fact that the “international community” is a generalized term that so far none of you “administrators” have been able to specify. UN members including the United States recognize Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan, therefore the disclaimer you keep trying to add is factually incorrect. Dpb126948 (talk) 14:24, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is the sort of discussion you should be having on an article talk page or in a central discussion forum as I already noted. 331dot (talk) 14:32, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice how you still haven’t answered any of my questions. Dpb126948 (talk) 14:32, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 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.

331dot (talk) 14:33, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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."

You do not yet have 500 edits, so you should not directly make edits related to the Arab/Israeli conflict, broadly construed(which includes territorial claims). Your accusations without evidence are uncivil and you have edit warred. You may(and should) discuss your concerns in the proper forum. If your behavior continues once the block expires, you will be blocked indefinitely without further warning. 331dot (talk) 14:35, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lol hilarious how rather than answer any of my questions like someone who’s confident that they’re correct would, you instead went ahead and blocked me from editing. Sad that you’d rather gatekeep information through your political bias rather than accept the fact that you’re wrong and listen to the facts being given to you. Dpb126948 (talk) 14:36, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have no position in your dispute, just how you are going about it- which is completely wrong. 331dot (talk) 14:38, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How exactly is it “wrong”? This was one of the questions I asked you, to which you still haven’t answered.

If I’m “wrong”, then why can’t you answer any of my questions? Why do you lack the confidence to prove your point using facts and logic without power tripping and calling those who disagree with you “wrong”? Dpb126948 (talk) 14:40, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that this content has been included in identical or similar form across many articles, does not make it a disclaimer. It has been included an kept for various lengths of time under an express consensus or an implicit consensus because editors thought that it enriches the readers understanding of the subject. It is also not so unusual or specific to this region. See Kosovska Mitrovica, Zvečan, Zubin Potok. I am not completely certain that this is a good practice, and need more time to think about it, but you were making these removals in too sudden and sweeping of a fashion without giving people chance to think about the implications. I hope that we will keep collaborating on this and discussing this more once you meet the requirements for participation in this contentious area. Regards —Alalch E. 14:41, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have indeed answered you. "Your accusations without evidence are uncivil and you have edit warred. You may(and should) discuss your concerns in the proper forum." As an admin I cannot take a position in your dispute with the other editors involved. You need to have a civil, collaborative discussion without personal attacks and unfounded accusations.

I can say it is demonstratably false that only Israeli settlement articles have what you term a "disclaimer"(which it isn't). Look at any article about Russian occupied territory in Ukraine. 331dot (talk) 14:44, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel this block is unjustified, you may follow the provided instructions to appeal. 331dot (talk) 14:47, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As far as the merits, please review WP:OR. You are making an argument that sources refute, for example There are more than 30 Israeli settlements in the Golan, which are home to an estimated 20,000 people. The settlements are considered illegal under international law, although Israel disputes this. On the process, you are not permitted to edit these articles as you do not have the required experience with our policies, such as WP:OR and WP:NPOV. You are also edit-warring, which is against the edit-warring policy. So, wrong on substance, wrong on process. nableezy - 15:53, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lol comparing Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine proves that your entire motivation for keeping this disclaimer listed at the top of the Wikipedia pages of every Israeli town in the Golan Heights (except the Druze ones for some reason) is political and rooted in antizionist bias. Russia-Ukraine is an ongoing conflict, whereas the 6 day war ended in 1967 and Israel has since had full control over the Golan for over 50 years now. Why aren’t there any disclaimers at the top of the Wikipedia pages of every American town in the southwest that was gained after the Mexican-American war? Why aren’t there any disclaimers at the top of the Wikipedia pages of every Kurdistani town in Turkey or Iraq? Why is Israel receiving so much unbalanced attention from Wikipedia admins? Why is Antizionism considered “neutral” when it can’t even be defended with facts?

I’ve asked this question several times and haven’t received an answer yet, so many you can be the first one to do so. Which “international community” specifically doesn’t recognize Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan? Why does this “community” speak for the entire world? The fact that several UN members such as the United States legally recognize Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights proves that this disclaimer that you keep trying to add to every Wikipedia page about Israeli towns in the Golan is factually incorrect.

You need to learn how to use facts and common sense to defend your arguments. Dpb126948 (talk) 07:34, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article content is not controlled by admins, but by the community as a whole, which tries to summarize what independent reliable sources state about a topic, not your personal views or those of the Israeli government(the latter of which are noted in articles). You are not permitted to directly make edits in the topic area of Israel as you do not yet have 500 edits(and many of the edits you do have are to that prohibited area). If you aren't going to request unblock, there is nothing else to do here until your block expires. While blocked, you only have access to this page to request to be unblocked. 331dot (talk) 08:53, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The facts are the Druze towns in the Golan, populated by Syrian Druze, are not settlements, and are not considered illegal under international law. The international community does not, with one notable exception, consider the Golan to be Israel's sovereign territory, they consider it to be Syrian territory held under Israeli occupation. Now you dont have to agree with that, you dont have to like it, but it is what the overwhelming majority of sources say. They also say that the populated places that Israel has established in that occupied territory, as in the other occupied territories of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and formerly in the Gaza Strip, are settlements (a euphemism for colonies), that are illegal under international law for violating the Geneva Convention's prohibition on the transfer of civilians in to territory held under belligerent occupation. Those are the facts, and they are backed up by countless sources. You can read some of them in the citations at Israeli settlements and international law. Regardless, you may not edit in this topic area, and if you continue to do so you will be blocked again. nableezy - 22:10, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lol and which “international community” exactly are you referring to? Several major nations including the United States recognize Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan, but the fact of the matter is that those who don’t recognize it don’t matter because the Golan has been under full Israeli diplomatic control for over 50 years now with little-no dispute from Syria since the end of the 6 day war. This is the fact that you keep trying to ignore and deflect from, because of course you have political bias against Israel and Zionism rooted in a deep support for jihad. Adding labels onto Wikipedia articles is your desperate attempt at trying to change this reality, although the more I think about it the more it makes sense to just let keyboard warriors like yourself have your way with the specifics of Wikipedia articles considering the fact that they don’t change reality, which is that the Golan Heights is fully Israeli. :) Dpb126948 (talk) 16:30, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cool story bro. The articles you had been editing have been protected to disallow you from doing so again. You may find your time better spent in a forum, as this is a project to create an encyclopedia, not argue with random people on the internet about things out of your depth. Take care. nableezy - 16:38, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopedias require facts, such as the fact that the Golan Heights is fully sovereign Israeli land. :) Dpb126948 (talk) 20:12, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Facts are in the eye of the beholder. The international community disagrees with you and the Israeli government. As such, that's what reliable sources report, and what we summarize. You are free to disagree with what sources say, but that doesn't change anything. 331dot (talk) 20:17, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

www.abarim-publications.com

Note that www.abarim-publications.com which you used as a source for items in Quran and History of the Quran (both since reverted) has all the markings of an unreliable self-published source. Erp (talk) 04:24, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

Hello, I'm Hey man im josh. I noticed that in this edit to Josh Mandel, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:34, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

Hello, I'm Havradim. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Bethany seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Havradim leaf a message 12:54, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]