User talk:Settleman

Settleman, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure!

The

Adventure

Hi Settleman!! You're invited: learn how to edit Wikipedia in under an hour. I hope to see you there! Ocaasi

Play The Wikipedia Adventure

This message was delivered by HostBot (talk) 17:32, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 24 July

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Susya page, your edit caused a duplicate page number error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. May I ask if you have edited Wikipedia before, and if so, under what account name(s)? Cheers, Huldra (talk) 20:38, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I read it a lot but didn't edit before. A friend showed me how easy it is so I took a shot. With Susya being in the news so much lately here in Israel, the article seemed completely unreadable. Settleman (talk) 21:07, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but please do not take major moves (like you did) before discussing it on the talk-page: that is rather disruptive, Huldra (talk) 21:17, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Khirbet Susya for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Khirbet Susya is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khirbet Susya until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Huldra (talk) 23:13, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Susya, Har Hebron for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Susya, Har Hebron is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Susya, Har Hebron until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Huldra (talk) 23:14, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Susya, Har Hebron

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Susya, Har Hebron. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Susya. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Susya – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 03:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I came across this doc. May be it"ll be interesting to you: HCJ 399/06 Susya Cooperative Agricultural Society et al. v. The Government of Israel et al. Chief Justice A. Barak (Concurring, Justices D. Beinisch and E. Rivlin) "Residents of the Israeli town, Susya, petitioned to the Court in order that the Fence be rerouted to include their town on the Israeli side of the Fence. Their petition was rejected by the Court. Chief Justice A. Barak explained that:.."
--Igorp_lj (talk) 14:35, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

History merge of 2006 Jerusalem gay pride parade

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. -- Irn (talk) 15:01, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Modi'in Illit

Shalom. You seem to know a lot more about Israel than I do--do you know if Modi'in Illit is a city or settlement? It looks like a city to me. The article uses both, which seems strange to me. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 17:14, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is a city but since it is in the west bank people might use the word "settlement" to highlight the fact it is illegal by some international standards. (While at it, if you don't know enough please read again the points made by editors here b/c it is a complex case and I have a strong feeling you aren't familiar with it.) Settleman (talk) 05:30, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do, but contrary to most Wikipedians, I am not left-wing...Zigzig20s (talk) 12:26, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Yaakov Havakook, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thriller. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:06, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quesiton. Doesn't Regavim also file legal suits to protect nature reserves from Bedouin encampments and grazing sheep?E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:04, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AE report

Please see [1]. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 08:45, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Susya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dura. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 26 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BRD

Hello. Can I ask you to read WP:BRD, it is something that helps avoid edit-wars. The basic premise is that if you make a change that is reverted it should not be re-reverted until there is a consensus for doing so. Thank you. nableezy - 15:45, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads-up. After skimming through it I can't see how adding information from articles dealing directly with the subject of the article fits WP:BOLD. Settleman (talk) 17:31, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Every change is bold. The point of that practice is to make it so when something is challenged the article returns to its past stable state and remains there until there is consensus to change it. But to the point, you arent adding material from articles dealing directly with the subject of the wikipedia article, they deal with it tangentially. Thats more a discussion for the talk page though. nableezy - 17:55, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pings and notifications

Btw, on a technical note, your edit here will not generate a ping to Nishidani. In order for pings to work, the relevant diff must contain a signature. If you already have a signature, remove it and sign it again. See this for technical details. Kingsindian ♝♚ 19:02, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

WP:ARBPIA3 is now open and evidence can be submitted until September 8. 62.90.5.221 (talk) 09:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1RR

Hi, you have just broken 1RR on Regavim (NGO): please self-revert, or you might be reported, Huldra (talk) 18:46, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the kind warning. Settleman (talk) 19:13, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for self-everting. Whatever you believe: I would actually much, much rather spend my time building articles, than spending time on the 1RR boards, or any other WP-boards, Cheers, Huldra (talk) 20:17, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I completely believe you. I looked at your log and you defiantly get around. Settleman (talk) 20:19, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, yepp, defiantly is the word, Huldra (talk) 23:47, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Halleluyah :-) Settleman (talk) 05:23, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, since you asked elsewhere, definitely is the correct spelling. Though defiantly might be unintentionally correct in some places. Kingsindian ♝♚ 17:04, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 3/Evidence

You've mentioned "Editors conduct issues" and an individual. Would you please remove this as there are no parties to this case and we aren't discussing individual editors, but how to improve editing in this area. Thanks. Doug Weller (talk) 12:57, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: I plan on adding more material. I believe some extreme cases should be discussed like in WP:ARBPIA2. Settleman (talk) 13:09, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: If an editor practices severe POVPUSH, CPUSH and violates NPA - where should I take it? Incidents seems to wave it on the base of 'content dispute'. Settleman (talk) 17:32, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DRN, ANI, request a new case. Please remove it or I'll have to do it or get a clerk to do it. Other editors are not in the scope of this case. It's already attracting attention from other editors. I did ask another editor to remove their comments at around the same time I asked you and they did. Doug Weller (talk) 17:39, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Battleground spirit ; removal of source material

I ask you to stop harassing me: [2] or I will report you. Pluto2012 (talk) 06:54, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pluto2012: Oh, you are so cute. You enter irrelevant info into a section I have spent hours drafting and you make empty threats??? What does a 'status quo' (this isn't french wikipedia) from 200 years ago have to do with the current situation on Temple Mount? Can you provide one source that make this connection? It might be a good source for Status quo (Holy Land sites) but not where you placed it! Settleman (talk) 07:28, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editing ; former editing on wp

Hello,

Could you please tell us :

if you have ever edited wikipedia before with another account ?
if you are paid for editing wikipedia ? [3]

Thank you. Pluto2012 (talk) 07:00, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, you may not. To get respect, you need to give respect and your behavior and edits were anything but respectful. Settleman (talk) 07:22, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you refuse to tell us :

if you edited before, which is your right at some conditions: Wikipedia:Clean start#Notification and permission that I fear that you don't comply with;
if you are paid or not despite Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Your comments about me are in infraction with WP:AGF.

Pluto2012 (talk) 08:21, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see a policy called WP:BEASUCKER and I don't intend to be one. So like I said, to get respect, you need to give respect. If you keep pushing me around I will ask an admin to get involved. Settleman (talk) 12:19, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't push you around. I have asked you precise questions and I have been there for 10 years so I have numerous articles in my "watchlist", Temple Mount being of course one of them.

By the way :

you accuse me of being racist : Don't Be a Sucker!, for which you should deserve a block.
you keep refusing to answer my former questions, which can be considered as answering them anyway.

Thank you. Pluto2012 (talk) 12:47, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yawn. I answered Huldra before and I said I'm not willing to be a sucker. Yawn. Settleman (talk) 12:53, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pluto2012, Settleman - FYI: Caution: AGF & EQ --Igorp_lj (talk) 10:02, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ARBPIA 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.

Mentorship

Over at WP:ANI, User:Irondome has offered to help mentor you around the sometimes difficult terrain here, and I have also offered what help I can. If I could offer one pointer right away, you seem to in some of the sections above be saying that if others want your respect, they will have to earn it. That is true, but the same would hold for you, and, honestly, given the comparatively short length of time you have been editing, might be seen to be more incumbent on you than on others. May I very seriously suggest that you refrain from making any comments regarding other editors which might not unreasonably be taken as being unduly personal in nature, in any way, because, unfortunately, such comments tend to make things worse, not better. John Carter (talk) 20:33, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@John Carter: I will appreciate any advise or guidance you can give me and if you look at my past edits and discussions you'll see I was open to it in the past. My comment to Pluto came after he hounded me and was blocked for doing so, later he bugged me about NPoV in an article and then he ask me if I have edited before after his pal Huldra had already done so. His comment about me supposedly blaming him for being a racist is exactly the type of nonsense that makes me lose AGF towards another editor. Settleman (talk) 07:53, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

BRD and CON

I dont quite get what you dont understand about consensus, but when every single person besides you that has commented on an edit has opposed it you do not have consensus to include it an article. Im getting slightly fed up with this behavior, and if it continues I will seek administrative relief. Kindly self-revert the edit until there is consensus for it. This is not a topic area in which forcing an edit into an article through edit-warring as a modus operandi will end well for an editor. nableezy - 08:36, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nableezy: There was nothing bold about adding relevant info. Settleman (talk) 08:41, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We've gone through this before, and when everybody else says its not relevant you dont have consensus to restore it. nableezy - 08:54, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See talk. Settleman (talk) 09:09, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But just to be clear, you're not going to self-revert and actually get a consensus for your change instead of edit-warring? nableezy - 18:34, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See talk. I answered and asked Kingsindian to mediate. Settleman (talk) 18:48, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That was a simple question. Yes or no simple. nableezy - 19:08, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See talk. Settleman (talk) 19:22, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nableezy, consensus does not mean majority, not even if it is a big majority. If you have the majority you win, but it is not consensus. For consensus you would need to accommodate a range of points of view. That preference, for the inclusion of full the range of points of view, is why Wikipedia is called an encyclopedia, and why is not called a blog. Kwork2 (talk) 20:29, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Uhh your comment is the first mention of the word "majority" in this section. nableezy - 17:27, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent suggestion

Done. Needs expansion.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:29, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		In recognition for your tireless efforts to achieve accuracy and NPOV at articles on Susya

E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:20, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your Filing at DRN

Can you be more specific in your DRN listing here? For example, you mention "When a statement of Defense Minister Yaalon from a briefing about the attack was added." Which statement are you referring to and why is it not "acceptable," in your opinion? i.e. What specifically leads you to believe that this is an issue of POV? Please be aware that although lengthy discussion may have taken place off DRN, the discussions there appear to be quite political and unclear. --JustBerry (talk) 14:01, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Add it to the report, not here. --JustBerry (talk) 14:01, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, could you take a picture of the title, author as well as a whole page (output) of the Makor's article and put it there? --Igorp_lj (talk) 08:41, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a suspected sock puppet of Ashtul (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this is a sock puppet account, and your original account is blocked, please also note that banned or blocked users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; and all edits made under this account may be reverted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 16:32, 10 October 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).

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

Request reason:

I am NOT anybody else. Nothing else I can say about it or like I wrote on the investigation page "How can I prove, I don't have a sister?". Editors of strong opposing agenda have blamed me for being a few different former blocked editors and apparently it works. Can someone more sensible please look at it? Settleman (talk) 17:33, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Reading through the evidence page at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ashtul/Archive, I get the impression that you are, in fact, the same person as Ashtul. And as to your comment below, if some user claims (s)he thinks that you're some other person, but doesn't give any evidence, then that statement means nothing - you may notice that at User talk:Huldra#Settleman, Huldra explicitly tells the reporting user to report his/her suspicions in the appropriate place, as well as linking to a statement that "An editor must not accuse another of misbehavior without evidence". And not all Israelis get kicked out of Wikipedia; we have a number of Israelis here (including me); and some Palestinian users do get kicked out as well (such as PalestineRemembered, who was explicitly banned for improper behavior on articles related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 19:26, 19 October 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.

On Huldra talk page alone I was blamed of being 3 different socks Wlglunight93, Emanquresu and Averysoda. Is this how all Israelis got kicked out of Wikipedia? Settleman (talk) 13:12, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Od Mishehu: If you refer to that 1 sentence Huldra wrote as 'evidence' about the state of Susya article, you better look at how the article looked like before I started editing it. A mumbo-jumbo of of information taken from websites of pro-Palestinian organizations and activists which didn't even present the Israeli POV. The whole 'Modern Era' part is a huge mix and the word Susya may or may not refer to either Settlement, village or even the archaeological site. Can you even compare it to the current state (which is still not great but removing some of the UNDUE material was/is likely to get much resistance). Settleman (talk) 20:42, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Settleman & עוד מישהו Aside from the fact that user Huldra (who originally brought the allegations against you) has bias against you since this user has very strong editing stance against "settlements", - I little knowledge about the actuall investigation. It appears that the administrator believes Huldra and does not believe you that you were not sockpuppeting. Maybe you should request that they let you through this time and guarantee to never engage in sockpupeting in the future. Perhaps an administrator might agree to let you by this time especially since this is your first block. Caseeart (talk) 04:51, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine-Israel articles 3 arbitration case proposed decision posted

Hi Settleman. A decision has been proposed in the Palestine-Israel articles 3 arbitration case, for which you are on the notification list. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 20:41, 14 October 2015 (UTC) (via MediaWiki message delivery (talk))[reply]