User talk:Dovid

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 222 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Douglas Murray (author). This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. WP:ONUS is Wikipedia policy. If you have no respect for that I have no respect for you. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:42, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Moses Z. Margolies and family. Or is it Moses S. Margolies

Thanks for your work on expanding the article for Moses Z. Margolies, which was part of a chain of new article creations more than 15 years ago that took me to to the 1933 anti-Nazi boycott and down through the Lookstein family. I had used the "Sebulun" spelling because that was what had been used in many of the older sources, but the orthography has clearly shifted to a "Z" as the first letter. I never would have realized that there was a connection to John Margolies, which is an excellent catch. Keep up the great work and let me know if I can help with anything. Alansohn (talk) 19:49, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Alansohn. I've edited RAMAZ before and done some work on the Lookstein articles as well. What led me to this is a personal connection between a family member who was a rabbi, and the rivalry between Rabbi Margolies and Rabbi "Velvele" Margolis.Dovid (talk) 20:13, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The whole thing is a great story that keeps on giving. Keep it up and let me know if there's anything I can do in this area. Alansohn (talk) 20:18, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Selfstudier (talk) 15:52, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2024

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:53, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]