This is an old revision of this page, as edited by EdJohnston (talk | contribs) at 00:17, 24 November 2014 (→Your request for more discussion at WP:AE: You can make that argument at WP:AE). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 00:17, 24 November 2014 by EdJohnston (talk | contribs) (→Your request for more discussion at WP:AE: You can make that argument at WP:AE)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Archives | |||||
|
|||||
A barnstar for you!
The Writer's Barnstar | |
Dear Oncenawhile, thank your for your contributions to Misplaced Pages, especially your recent creation of Mutamassirun. You are making a difference here! With regards, Anupam 08:23, 5 June 2014 (UTC) |
Disambiguation link notification for June 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
- Jewish refugees (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Palestinian exodus
- Refugee (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Palestinian exodus
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Phoenicianism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Coptic (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) 08:55, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Reference Errors on 2 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 Cuneiform page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter 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) 00:21, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Irhuleni, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Assyrian. 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) 08:55, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
July 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Canaan may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- but regularly as a land that had become something else, and as a people who had been annihilated)."}}</ref> and following the emigration of Canaanite speakers to ], was also used as a self-
- threatening in that of his successor, displacing the Amorites and prompting a resumption of Semitic] migration. ] and his son ], at first afraid of the Hittites, afterwards made
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:55, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Book of Gates may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 ""s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- them up into four categories that are now conventionally labelled "Reth" (Egyptians), "Aamu" (], "Themehu" (]), and "Nehesu" (]). These are
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:23, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Your AE complaint about 1950–1951 Baghdad bombings
Your AE complaint has been closed with warnings to you and Plot Spoiler. Further unilateral reverts may lead to a topic ban from ARBPIA. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 15:26, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
the Aamu
Before renaming any files, perhaps you should discuss it first. See Talk:Canaan#Image_of_Canaanite. Y-barton (talk) 03:02, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
DYK for One Million Plan
On 17 July 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article One Million Plan, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the 1944 One Million Plan was the first time Jewish immigration from Arab and Muslim countries became official policy of the Zionist leadership? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/One Million Plan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Gatoclass (talk) 04:39, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Reference Errors on 20 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 Sea Peoples page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter 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) 00:26, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Eshmunazar II sarcophagus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dor. 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) 09:40, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
You are engaging in disruptive editing
User Oncenawhile, you are apparently engaging in disruptive editing - see your recent actions of Expulsions of Egyptian Jews (1956). I remind you that you are editing WP:ARBPIA articles and should pay attention to details, considering recent warnings.GreyShark (dibra) 10:41, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
- User:Greyshark09, you have had three months to respond to the concerns I raised at Talk:Expulsions of Egyptian Jews (1956). See User_talk:Greyshark09#Talk:Expulsion_of_Egyptian_Jews_.281956.29. Oncenawhile (talk) 10:49, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
- The rename procedure was made on August 7, don't try to get away with this.GreyShark (dibra) 10:50, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
- User:Greyshark09, this relates directly to the points previously raised. Please respond to them. I have no intention to edit war - I want to discuss. So please respond to the detailed concerns i have raised to the article which you wrote. Oncenawhile (talk) 10:53, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
- The rename procedure was made on August 7, don't try to get away with this.GreyShark (dibra) 10:50, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Pogrom
I noticed you reverted someone's attempt -- an attempt based apparently on WP:DONTLIKEIT -- to remove the sourced Olmert quotes from the Pogrom article. I undid the latest reversion (which came from someone who was recently formally warned on Arab-Israeli editing), and User:Galassi promptly reverted my undo, yet again for the absurd and invalid reason of there being "no consensus for inclusion" (see Talk:Pogrom#POV_pushing if your memory needs refreshing on all of this fun). He's now done this twice in the past several hours, and appears to be using Twinkle to aid him in his suppression of sourced content. It strikes me that you've an interest in maintaining the article in a state characterized by well-sourced citations, NPOV language, and an atmosphere as free as possible from meta-political considerations, be they made through coatracking or via conspicuous absence of relevant information. It also strikes me that you're a much more experienced Wiki editor than me. Hopefully I'm wrong in this assumption, but I foresee the possibility of yet another edit war over the Olmert "pogrom" quotes sourced content. I don't know the ins and outs of WP:3RR, or whether or not my continued undoing of reverts based on spurious and unencyclopedic (read:political) reasons will expose me to something like a temporary ban from editing for violating 3RR. I would appreciate your help or, at least, your advice in this matter. Thanks so much Direct action (talk) 20:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
- This user is really active about recent conflict and it seems he writes not so unbiased text --CONFIQ (talk) 20:42, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
DYK for Tabnit sarcophagus
On 14 August 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tabnit sarcophagus, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a "wonderful fluid" in the sarcophagus of King Tabnit (pictured) kept him unusually well-preserved for over two millennia, but its secret was lost when workmen spilled it? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tabnit sarcophagus. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:21, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Criticism of the Israeli government, name discussion
hi
I noticed that you had previously contributed to Talk:Criticism of the Israeli government#Better name for article? and thought I'd let you know that a similar discussion has opened at Talk:Criticism of the Israeli government#Request move Gregkaye (talk) 16:14, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Descendants of Israelites
Recent edits to Israelites on the genetics of Palestinians seem to contradict what Palestinian people says about their genetics. I'd appreciate your input. I've had problems with the same IP 24.42.116.19 (talk · contribs) at Groups claiming affiliation with Israelites which also needs attention. I've removed stuff the IP added about the Lemba being agreed to be of Israelite descent (people don't seem to even bother to read main articles). Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 08:57, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Doug, thanks for bringing this to my attention. I think that the work on I-P genetics on wikipedia needs a huge cleanup, as most of the "conclusions" being pushed by various editors are still in the realm of scientific conjecture at this stage as opposed to hard facts. I'm not ready to go into bat on the topic though as I would need to do a full review of the latest research before I could do so in a meaningful fashion.
- Oncenawhile (talk) 10:57, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
- That's ok, but would you take a look at Talk:Israelites? Lots of OR, assumptions about the Cohen Modal Prototype, misuse of sources, etc. At least IMHO. I reverted a big chunk and don't think it should be replaced without clear evidence about the current prevailing opinion. Dougweller (talk) 11:15, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Israelites, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Phoenician. 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) 09:20, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
List of ethnic cleansings
FYI please see Talk:List of ethnic cleansings#RfC: Inclusion criteria -- PBS (talk) 22:14, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
- Having done your merge I think you need to adjust the lead from "follow definitions given in this article" to perhaps "follow definitions given in the ethnic cleansings article" or something similar.
- On a completely different subject as this page is getting very large why not set up a bot to archive this page? If you are not sure how to do it, see Talk:List of ethnic cleansings where I am about to do the same.
Disambiguation link notification for August 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Commemorative stela of Nahr el-Kalb, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tyre. 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) 09:20, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
September 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Azekah Inscription may have broken the syntax by modifying 4 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨) |
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:32, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1834 Safed pogrom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lydda. 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) 09:10, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Paralia (Palestine)
The article Paralia (Palestine) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Just a dictionary definition. Not enough to justify a stand alone article although the name could be mentioned in the article on Palestine.
While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. noq (talk) 12:12, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Nomination of Paralia (Palestine) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paralia (Palestine) is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Paralia (Palestine) 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. noq (talk) 13:02, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, Onceinawhile. You have new messages at Noq's talk page.Message added 18:55, 21 September 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
noq (talk) 18:55, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Reference Errors on 24 September
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 Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries page, your edit caused a cite 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) 00:17, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
How many Iranian Jews?
Hi. Can I get your help with editing and input on some edit warring over the number of Jews in Iran? I noticed that on several articles, newer info was being suppressed. I've seen many attempts to keep the number at 30,000 in Iran - this is what Jews now says without citation, cuz of this edit of yours, which removed a cited figure of around 9,000. Please consider putting it back, as it's based on an actual, official, recent government census); see http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/07/29/229078.html or http://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-woman-brutally-murdered-in-iran-over-property-dispute/#ixzz3Ac6duaqw or the government's own report, https://www.amar.org.ir/Portals/1/Iran/90.pdf. If you wish to discuss, I'd prefer if you reply here; I'll be watching. --{{U|Elvey}} 20:30, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Arab satellite lists
Hello! Your submission of Arab satellite lists at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Alex2006 (talk) 18:05, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
DYK for Commemorative stela of Nahr el-Kalb
On 8 October 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Commemorative stela of Nahr el-Kalb, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the commemorative stela of Nahr el-Kalb include inscriptions dedicated to Ramesses II in hieroglyphics, Esarhaddon in cuneiform, Caracalla in Latin, Barquq in Arabic and Napoleon III in French? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Commemorative stela of Nahr el-Kalb. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:04, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Stela/stelae of Nahr el-Kalb
Hi, Oncenawhile. I've left a comment on the talk page … Awien (talk) 13:29, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
DYK for Arab satellite lists
On 10 October 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Arab satellite lists, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that for the first two decades of Knesset elections, Israeli Arabs were represented mainly by Arab satellite lists and communist parties? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Arab satellite lists. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:03, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Philistines, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Medinet Habu. 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) 09:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
letter
Hi Do you have access to IDF archives?--Shrike (talk) 09:47, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Definitions of pogrom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Minority. 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) 10:27, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Enforcement notice
Dear user Oncenawhile, a case of WP:ARBPIA sanctions enforcement has been opened regarding your recent actions at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. Thank you.GreyShark (dibra) 23:14, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
November 2014
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring, as you did at Jewish refugees. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:12, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
- Hi HJ Mitchell, thanks for looking in to this. I have been editing for almost five years, and am particularly experienced in a difficult area, and I am very proud of my clean history. I have always done my best to avoid both edit-warring and AE-warring. Specifically I generally try to avoid attacking other editors at AE, as I would rather build trust and mutual respect and as AE admins you have enough on your plate.
- The decision to block me was taken in just over an hour of Greyshark's AE filing, possibly tarnishing my previously perfect behaviourial record without allowing me time to comment.
- You correctly pointed out at the AE that Greyshark did not report Galassi in his filing despite Galassi crossing 1RR first. This is an important part of the context here. Unfortunately our editing history shows that Greyshark has negative feelings towards me, and I suspect this was just an attempt to hurt me.
- The content dispute with Galassi is not a complex one; (s)he was simply reincluding a sentence without adding supporting evidence per WP:V. During the debate with Galassi (always with thoughful and detailed edit comments), I spotted Galassi's original 1RR, and then checked the page to confirm this was not under ARBPIA before proceeding. I did not cross 3RR at any point. I also opened a talk page discussion, as I had decided to stop after reaching the 3RR (broadly defined, since it was over a more than 24 hour period, I always feel it is better not to get too close, and follow the spirit instead of the rules).
- A block of Galassi and me in this situation helps only Greyshark, and encourages use of AE as a battleground.
- I would like to appeal this as far as a I can go because I do not want my history tarnished - proper behaviour here is something I value very highly. Please could you let me know what I should do next?
- Oncenawhile (talk) 10:10, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
- Thinking about this a little more I would really appreciate the opportunity to comment at the AE thread before it closes. Could I be temporarily unblocked so that I can contribute there (I am happy to commit to not editing any other pages during this period)? I would like at the very least to draw people's attention to the quality of edit comments made on the page, which shows that neither Galassi nor I were "edit warring" in the classic sense, insofar as we were engaging in good faith discussion via the edit comments since Galassi had provided new sources each time. Oncenawhile (talk) 11:30, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
- Hi HJ Mitchell, just one last quick point - for the avoidance of doubt I would request that Greyshark09 is NOT investigated or punished for the questionable selectivity in his AE filing. Whilst the deterioriated relationship between Greyshark and me is the real issue underlying the AE, I would much rather this situation might act as a catalyst for Greyshark and me to talk to each other, bury the hatchet and rebuild a little trust. I have always respected Greyshark and as I have said to him in the past I would like to repair our relationship. We both have complimentary knowledge bases on similar subjects and real collaboration between us has proven successful in the past. AE warring, a path down which I have seen other editors led, only seems to increase the emotional stakes between editors and builds further barriers to the collaboration that some of our more difficult topic areas desparately need. Oncenawhile (talk) 12:22, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
- If you agree not to edit the article in question or engage in a dispute about similar material in other articles for the remainder of the original 48 hours, I'll unblock you. You can still edit the talk page, and you can comment on the AE thread if you wish. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:13, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
- Hi HJ Mitchell, I agree to those terms. Please could you offer Galassi the same? I hope (s)he will respond to my comment on the article talk page. Oncenawhile (talk) 23:23, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
- Done. I've already extended the same offer to Galassi. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:23, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
- Hi HJ Mitchell, I agree to those terms. Please could you offer Galassi the same? I hope (s)he will respond to my comment on the article talk page. Oncenawhile (talk) 23:23, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
- If you agree not to edit the article in question or engage in a dispute about similar material in other articles for the remainder of the original 48 hours, I'll unblock you. You can still edit the talk page, and you can comment on the AE thread if you wish. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:13, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
- Hi HJ Mitchell, just one last quick point - for the avoidance of doubt I would request that Greyshark09 is NOT investigated or punished for the questionable selectivity in his AE filing. Whilst the deterioriated relationship between Greyshark and me is the real issue underlying the AE, I would much rather this situation might act as a catalyst for Greyshark and me to talk to each other, bury the hatchet and rebuild a little trust. I have always respected Greyshark and as I have said to him in the past I would like to repair our relationship. We both have complimentary knowledge bases on similar subjects and real collaboration between us has proven successful in the past. AE warring, a path down which I have seen other editors led, only seems to increase the emotional stakes between editors and builds further barriers to the collaboration that some of our more difficult topic areas desparately need. Oncenawhile (talk) 12:22, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
- Thinking about this a little more I would really appreciate the opportunity to comment at the AE thread before it closes. Could I be temporarily unblocked so that I can contribute there (I am happy to commit to not editing any other pages during this period)? I would like at the very least to draw people's attention to the quality of edit comments made on the page, which shows that neither Galassi nor I were "edit warring" in the classic sense, insofar as we were engaging in good faith discussion via the edit comments since Galassi had provided new sources each time. Oncenawhile (talk) 11:30, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Your request for more discussion at WP:AE
Hello Oncenawhile. Regarding your post at AE, "could we keep this open until I have had a chance to have my position heard?". What did you mean by 'having my position heard'? The dispute at Jewish refugees does not involve Plot Spoiler, and there were clear 1RR violations. That means there was no special need to examine the motivations of those reverting. What do you think would be accomplished by more discussion? EdJohnston (talk) 17:26, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
- Hi EdJohnston, if I understood HJ Mitchell's comments correctly the edits have not been deemed to fall under ARBPIA's 1RR rule (consistent with my own conclusion at the time when Galassi crossed that line first), but rather under WP:EW. As to the specific issue at hand, both Galassi and I showed clear evidence of "trying to resolve the disagreement through discussion" (i.e. my detailed edit comments and moving to the talk page, and Galassi's good faith attempts to provide appropriate sourcing). So we find ourselves in a very strange situation where neither editor involved believed there was any edit warring, yet we have both been punished.
- Either way, in terms of what I would like to be accomplished, my real concern is the building of a misleading disciplinary record. As I mentioned, the two prior warnings being referred to did not assign any specific fault against me or any other editor, as my complaints were never fully investigated. Yet those warnings are now being used to cast aspersions against me and will likely be used again, just as this block will, by editors who would like to build a narrative to make me look like a disruptive editor.
- For what it's worth, when editing in the I-P area my intention is to build collaboration between editors from both sides. I even prepared a Wikimania Leaflet, and a list of precedent scholarly collaborations, to try to encourage more people into the spirit. But not all editors think like this and many would prefer to work alongside only people who think as they do, hence the increasingly common ARBPIA AE-warring which I think is often destructive to the project.
- Oncenawhile (talk) 19:37, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
- The page at Talk:Jewish refugees carries the banner {{Arab-Israeli Arbitration Enforcement}}. This makes the page eligible for the ARBPIA 1RR. Can you quote anything by User:HJ Mitchell that makes you think 1RR does not apply? EdJohnston (talk) 20:16, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Ed, I was referring to this comment. Also, please note that the banner was added after the AE. Oncenawhile (talk) 21:39, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
- Your edits at Jewish refugees seem to concern Jews who were seeking refuge in Israel. If so that would fall under the Arab-Israeli conflict. Also note that a person can be blocked for an ARBPIA 1RR violation without being (yet) eligible for discretionary sanctions. I think that is the point of HJM's comment about WP:AEBLOCK. If admin is consciously making an AE block (not a conventional block) they are supposed to use the {{uw-aeblock}} template. Such a template was not used in your case. EdJohnston (talk) 22:07, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Ed, to my mind, whether the edit fell under ARBPIA is a grey area which both Galassi and I interpreted in the same way. I don't disagree that one can make the argument both ways, but since there was "silent consensus" amongst the two involved editors at the time it seems unduly harsh for a third party to take a different view without letting us know politely at the time. Which is what puzzles me with this block - nothing was getting out of hand, noone was being disrupted, and both editors were behaving cordially. We had already moved to talk, so the block achieved nothing other than blackening a clean disciplinary record.
- To that point, would you mind responding to the other points made in my response to you at 19:37? Oncenawhile (talk) 00:03, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
- Whether Jewish refugees falls under WP:ARBPIA or not needs more than two editors to decide. If you want to make that argument, why not do so in the WP:AE complaint. EdJohnston (talk) 00:17, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
- Your edits at Jewish refugees seem to concern Jews who were seeking refuge in Israel. If so that would fall under the Arab-Israeli conflict. Also note that a person can be blocked for an ARBPIA 1RR violation without being (yet) eligible for discretionary sanctions. I think that is the point of HJM's comment about WP:AEBLOCK. If admin is consciously making an AE block (not a conventional block) they are supposed to use the {{uw-aeblock}} template. Such a template was not used in your case. EdJohnston (talk) 22:07, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Ed, I was referring to this comment. Also, please note that the banner was added after the AE. Oncenawhile (talk) 21:39, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
- The page at Talk:Jewish refugees carries the banner {{Arab-Israeli Arbitration Enforcement}}. This makes the page eligible for the ARBPIA 1RR. Can you quote anything by User:HJ Mitchell that makes you think 1RR does not apply? EdJohnston (talk) 20:16, 23 November 2014 (UTC)