Jump to content

User talk:Nableezy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notice of noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Pyramids09 (talk) 08:42, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shiny thingy for you

A cut but still vigorous watermelon
For defending UNGA resolution 37/43

Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed strugglehako9 (talk) 18:45, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Noticeboard Notice (October 2024)

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:28, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is My involvement with ARBPIA. Thank you. Compassionate727 (T·C) 17:44, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

accusations

Your repeated accusations of tendentious, disruptive, and gaming are incivil. A veteran editor should know that "the wrong version" is not gaming, it's standard rules of engagement. I started an RFC at the behest of the admin you summoned who confirmed my interpretation was reasonable. Please desist in your WP:ASPERSIONS. Andre🚐 19:37, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They are only aspersions if they are unsupported by evidence. I cited the evidence. The admin actually said "in this circumstance there is clearly no consensus to include at this time". Yes, you are gaming, yes it is disruptive. Anything else? nableezy - 19:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, the admin said, "start an RFC." Are you not aware of the long-time Wikipedia norm and procedure that an RFC means the status quo remains? Andre🚐 19:58, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Literally anybody can see that he said That said, in this circumstance there is clearly no consensus to include at this time. Someone should just start an rfc about the sentence in the lede of this article. If you are going to distort the record even now there really is nothing to speak to you about. Kindly take your leave from this page. Thank you. nableezy - 19:59, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. Thank you. Andre🚐 21:25, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request to make edit

Nableezy, I am requesting your permission, under your vested authority of being my mentor, to make an edit on the Damascus Gate article, under the section "Names." The edit which I wish to make is as follows:

The Crusaders called it St. Stephen's Gate (in Latin, Porta Sancti Stephani), highlighting its proximity to the site of martyrdom of Saint Stephen, marked since the time of Empress Eudocia by a church and monastery which lies outside the city walls.[1] The only editorial change that I'm making here is that I'm adding the words "...which lies outside the city walls." I am also noting its source.

References

  1. ^ Wilson, C. (1988). Jerusalem, the Holy City (Yerushalayim, ha-ʻIr ha-Ḳedoshah) (in Hebrew). Translated by Eli Schiller. Jerusalem: Ariʼel. p. 45. OCLC 19202469.

- Davidbena (talk) 13:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Totally fine, hope you’re doing well David. nableezy - 13:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, here we are doing well, in spite of our many challenges, most recently from Iran. Spent at least one-half hour on October 1, 2024 in a bomb shelter with other people from my village, they and their kids and their pets.13:40, 29 October 2024 (UTC) Davidbena (talk) 13:40, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hope you and yours stay safe David, take care. nableezy - 14:17, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My draft for a AN appeal

Nableezy and User:Euryalus, this is for your information. I am preparing a draft for an AN appeal to my limited Topic ban. So far, here is the draft:
I, Davidbena (talk · contribs · WHOIS), after successfully appealing my AE Topic ban on 16 May 2023, was appointed a mentor to counsel and assist me in my edits in the ARBPIA area (see here). After editing under this capacity for more than a year, I wish now to appeal my long-standing limited topic ban that was made some years earlier (which you can see here). Having the liimited ban lifted will enable me to return to editing in the ARBPIA area without limitations.

For a record of my past offenses, here is a list of former discussions which ended in either a block or a topic-ban:

  1. 2 August 2018 "frivolous ANI report"
  2. 13 August 2018 (topic ban)
  3. 23 February 2019: topic ban lifted
  4. 6 May 2019 (new topic ban).
  5. 21 November 2019: appeal to rescind the ban was unsuccessful
  6. 18 August 2020 (placed under narrow topic ban)
  7. 2 September 2021 (one-month block for canvassing)
  8. 29 January 2022 (broad topic ban), which ban was lifted on 16 May 2023 (as shown here) when I was assigned a mentor in the ARBPIA area, but leaving in place my narrow topic ban.

I am fully aware that my history of punitive measures taken against me by the community was started by my own short-sightedness in being quick to jump to judgment against my fellow co-editors in the ARBPIA area, whom I accused at first of "stalking". These accusations, as they later came to show, were proven inaccurate. I have since worked with the same editors on improving a number of articles in the ARBPIA area. Moreover, I am now fully aware that all edits made by the general consensus of all editors, especially of those holding different political views and who belong to different political spectrums, contribute to the overall uncensored preservation of history and of general knowledge. This is my honest view. I have worked in the past year with Wikipedia editor Nableezy who has opened my eyes to this realization, even though we hold different political views. I assure my fellow Wikipedia editors and those here arbitrating this case that I will continue to consult the views of others before posting a controversial edit in the ARBPIA area.Davidbena (talk) 16:19, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wholeheartedly support an appeal, and I cant imagine any of us in the topic area would oppose it. I'm not certain this is the ideal statement, I can try to give some ideas, but tbh it's almost 80 degrees today for me at the end of October and so I'm going golfing, so it would have to wait a bit for me to work through some thoughts later. Hopefully I can shoot the temperature like I do when it's 100. nableezy - 16:42, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
First, I think it be wise to list all the discussions and bans, you dont want people to say oh he's not being forthright. So each of the discussions Joe Roe listed here along with the ban from the Fram report here and then finally the appeal that resulted in the mentorship.

Next, I think the thing you really need to commit to is not questioning other's motives during discussions. If you recall the initial ban, it was imposed because of a report you files against Huldra and myself in which you were certain that our opposition to some edit was coming from some nefarious motive. A commitment to discuss content and not personalities would, I think, go a long way in addressing the cause for the initial ban. Other than that I think the message above reads as honest and I would hope that other editors agree. nableezy - 15:10, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Davidbena; I think Nab's advice here is good; start with making a link to all former discussions which ended in a topic-ban etc. You could do that on a subpage; and Nab(?) and I could add if you are missing any.
As for lifting the topic-ban itself; honestly, I am on the fence about how I would vote. I would like to vote for lifting it, but I haven't forgotten what happened last time I did so ("with some trepidation"). As I have told you before; when you edit 20th & 21th century stuff, you have had a tendency to "loose your cool". IMO; editing such areas needs you to step 10000 miles back from the subject. And I am unsure if you are able to do that. (I sincerely hope time will prove me wrong!)
Also; what Nab says about "personalising" conflict; it really shouldn't matter if anyone is a Jew, a Palestinian, an Arab or an Eskimo, or who you are married to, or even what level of education you have.
Cheers, Huldra (talk) 21:47, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, @Huldra:. I will take your advice. I have since learned that every person who contributes anything in this world, especially on Wikipedia, is on a special mission sent by God. It doesn't matter who we are, or what religion or ethnicity we belong to. In Israeli/Palestinian issues, it is all one continuous history, interlocked. That is my honest view. I appreciate your work in the Palestinian issues, just as I appreciate my own work in Israeli history, both old and new. Everything has its place. I have learnt on Wikipedia to appreciate other views and to be more open to them, even when I disagree. I will not force my own view upon others. That much I can assure you.Davidbena (talk) 21:57, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Davidbena: I hope you can also edit with those of us who don't believe in a God! (I am an agnostic (in my brain)/atheist (in my heart));/ cheers, Huldra (talk) 22:05, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, I can! Perhaps I can also convince you that God exists and is everywhere (smile).Davidbena (talk) 22:16, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, then you would be doing a better job than my dear aunts (who tried the same and failed), Huldra (talk) 22:19, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
HahahaDavidbena (talk) 22:36, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For your information, my appeal to rescind the limited topic ban has been posted to AN, which you can access here.Davidbena (talk) 01:25, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for all the work you've been doing to identify and eliminate LTA sock accounts. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 21:18, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited West Bank, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mount Nabi Yunis.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:56, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]