User talk:Yonoson3

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Yonoson3. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Electriccatfish2 (talk) 19:58, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is very good

Why not add it into the article, and see what other users think? Lobojo (talk) 01:16, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring on Elazar Shach

I noticed you are edit warring on Elazar Shach. please stop this now, and use the talk page to reach consensus. Remember that this page was protected previously, and nobody wants that to happen again. Failure to resolve your issues on the talk page and continued edit warring will likely result in a personal block against you. Debresser (talk) 16:16, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please notice that I have reported you for continued edit warring at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Yonoson3_reported_by_User:Debresser_.28Result:_.29. Debresser (talk) 08:12, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have no intention or interest in edit warring on the Elazar Shach page, however it is important that the rules be adhered to. In particular, especially when editing an article on a highly controversial figure like Elazar Shach, WP:BURDEN WP:PROVEIT are the starting points. I also notice you have repeatedly been in edit wars with others who complained about the same habit of dumping lots of unverifiable information on this page. That look like WP:SPAM. 12.234.78.2 (talk) 02:41, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable source on Elazar Shach

Hello, I notice you recently restoring much material on Elazar Shach that has never been heard anywhere before his grandson published a book with many wild claims. Funny is that this book only appears with all these discoveries many years after Shach dies and the grandson/author is too young to ever know any of this himself. Perhaps read wp:selfpub and wp:redflag to get guidance on what may be added. Also perhaps discuss material you like to add on the talk page to try for wp:consensus and what may be appropriate for wp:v. Much of what you add sounds very very unlikely even impossible? Sincerely, Sylvain —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.78.45.187 (talk) 04:17, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my recent comments on Elazar Shach talk page.Yonoson3 (talk) 04:45, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from misrepresenting and altering "quotes" to further your agenda, as you did recently on the Elazar Shach page. --Londoner77 (talk) 13:57, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop the edit warring on the Elazar Menachem Shach page.

Please stop edit warring and forcing information into the article. Use the discussion page to reach consensus with other editors before making changes. Londoner77 (talk) 08:33, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:RS before making edits that fail WP:V.

You have recently made a series of edits quoting 'sources' such as the self-published (by an unidentifiable pseudonym) 'Al hatora v'al hatemura' and by quoting an obviously controversial website (identfyingchabad.com), which I have removed. Might I suggest you review the policies above and comply with them, so that we might avoid this type of nonsense in the future? Thanking you in advance, --Winchester2313 (talk) 04:35, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Do not add unnecessary external links to The Schach article, per Talk:Elazar_Shach/Archive_1#Bookspam, and WP:EL. And please, don't revert me with the editsummary please explain. You know very well that you're not supposed to add superfluous external links. Please keep in mind, that if you continue with making trouble on that article, you will be restriceted from editing there. Debresser (talk) 11:45, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rav Shach

Hi, regarding your note on my talk page: Although I enjoy editing rabbinical pages, Rav Shach was a very polemic personality and I don't want to get involved in lashon hara here. Looking over the article, I'd say that it needs more citations from frum sources to balance the presentation. These would be sources such as Feldheim and the ArtScroll book about him, as well as online sources such as The Jewish Press, rather than quoting Ynet, Haaretz, and The Jerusalem Post, which are obviously going to be anti-Haredi. Best, Yoninah (talk) 07:20, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Somehow it looks like the regular media was a lot more honest about what Shach really was, a spiteful hateful and bitter old grump. Just listen to ANY speech of his and you will hear that. If you want to make the man look good why not stick to the color hat he wore and not pasting obviously false hype about him all over here. We're not all blind and deaf, you know?76.66.210.60 (talk) 06:10, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the references for the death of the etrog tree in Rabbi Michel Yehuda Lefkowitz's yard. I had heard rumors about it, but these newspaper articles came out after I expanded the page. Best, Yoninah (talk) 07:30, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

STOP your spamshit on Rav Shach page

Why dont you listen to people and begin to edit according to policy???? Use only valid sources and not hate sites or you will be blocked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.199.127.57 (talk) 04:39, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you're braindead or just a troll here to promote all Shach-related shit no matter how many policies you violate on the way. I think you have proven that you need to be banned from editing Shach or any other idiots page.--74.8.80.215 (talk) 17:40, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All IP editors who want to spout their opinions about rabbi Shach and this editor, go take a hike. I am no fan of rabbi Shach myself, but posting these hateful and anonymous posts doesn't do you any credit. Debresser (talk) 01:02, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli rabbi

In your last edit to Adin Steinzaltz, you also removed the description "Israeli rabbi" from the persondata template. Why? Debresser (talk) 00:58, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Woops, that was a mistake, I'll fix it right now.Yonoson3 (talk) 01:04, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. :) Debresser (talk) 01:05, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source

This source doesn't mention that all of Steinzaltz's works are under a ban, just 3 of them. Debresser (talk) 01:17, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but the other articles (Jewish Obsever, etc.) fill in the rest of the info.Yonoson3 (talk) 01:42, 30 December 2012 (UTC) That would be wp:synth which is not allowed.--C Steffen 22:49, 2 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Csteffen13 (talk • contribs) [reply]

The first source is a book? Or is it available on the web as well? Because the link didn't take me to any text. And the second link was inaccessible without some registration or something. Debresser (talk) 02:12, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see what I just added on the Elazar Shach talk page (in section headed "Adin Steinsaltz" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Elazar_Shach#Adin_Steinsaltz). I hope that clarifies things. If it still isn't clear, please continue the discussion there. Thanks Yonoson3 (talk) 05:52, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. Posted there. Debresser (talk) 08:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Elazar Shach, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mussar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:13, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Your edits on the Elazar Shach page continue to violate multiple policies, including: WP:RS WP:V WP:COPYVIO WP:NPOV

Despite having been warned multiple times by various editors, you continue to edit in the manner of a paid propagandist and not an objective encyclopedia. Please note that if you continue, I intend to shortly open a case against you requesting you be banned from editing the Elazar Shach page. DO NOT continue with controversial or questionably sourced edits before seeking consensus.--Winchester2313 (talk) 07:45, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Winchester, please don't "strashe the vantzen"! Please do not violate WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF as well as WP:BATTLEGROUND. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 05:34, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yonoson, your repeated restore of the claim that "all leaders etc. united" is not appreciated. And hiding a ridiculous statement behind a WP:RS discussion is misleading. If you continue like this, I will have to ask for sanctions, because this is becoming tedious (read: WP:TE). Debresser (talk) 22:44, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is Yonason really Shach gone wild online??

Seems to be the same guy, no? Both acting senile and doing the same stupid things over and over again. Both deaf and 1/2 blind. Is Yonason the new Shach or just a gilgul of the nasty old one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.223.51.86 (talk) 01:24, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Yonoson3. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Yonoson3. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]