User talk:JoeJShmo/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement topic ban

The following topic ban now applies to you:

You are topic banned from the Arab/Israel conflict, broadly construed, until six months have passed and you have made 1521 total edits.

You have been sanctioned for lack of understanding of WP:PAGS, NPOV issues, and a technical 1RR violation

This topic ban is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Palestine-Israel articles#Final decision and, if applicable, the contentious topics procedure. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. Please read WP:TBAN to understand what a topic ban is. If you do not comply with the topic ban, you may be blocked for an extended period to enforce the ban.

If you wish to appeal the ban, please read the appeals process. You are free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

please point me to the specific instances of NPOV and the 1RR violation you had in mind. Thank you. JoeJShmo^💌 13:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

This edit is a partial revert of this edit. This edit is a partial revert of this edit. This edit is a partial revert of this edit. The NPOV issues are covered in the section above. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:38, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I had been told that when an edit has been around for a long time (like those) common practice was not to count that towards 1RR. Was I misinformed? Or was my perception of 'a long time' off? JoeJShmo^💌 14:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

It's complicated. That you immediately returned to removing content after being reverted and demanded the other parties discuss and only partially revert, rather than you seeking consensus for your removals is part of the issue. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I actually didn't notice any of the reverts until I finished all 5 edits. I was focused on editing the article, and I wasn't looking at the revisions page. I did stop editing when I noticed someone was reverting, and moved to the talk page. I can see how you thought my 'don't fully revert' summary was a response to seeing my edits be reverted, but it's actually a summary I commonly leave when I do a multifaceted edit that I know may be taken issue with in one part, but in which case should only be partially reverted. I've left it before on other edits, I can hunt them down if needed. JoeJShmo^💌 15:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

As for NPOV: I was trying to enforce NPOV by treating the claims from both sides the same way, as they had different languages previously. The issue, as set out in the above discussion, was that I was mistaken in the way I went about it, as I changed both to say "claimed" while apparently they both should read "stated". @ScottishFinnishRadish In light of the difficulty in saying there was a violation of 1RR, and the lack of evidence of POV editing issues, I should like to humbly request that you reconsider this topic ban. JoeJShmo^💌 16:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Simply don't go into contentious areas while you're starting with Wikipedia, okay? No need for you to try and "enforce NPOV", as you simply don't have enough on-wiki experience to "enforce" anything, and you'll only annoy others. Just go and practice in non-contentious areas, learn how to select sources, how to balance different perspectives, get the difference between a policy, a guideline, an information page, and an essay, learn how to use noticeboards collaboratively, internalise the five pillars, etc. You really need to learn more before you start challenging more experienced editors. — kashmīrī ^TALK 21:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

The whole point of WP:ECR is to ensure that newbie editors get enough experience in less contentious areas of Wikipedia before jumping into the most controversial articles or topics of Wikipedia where conflicts are more abundant and where mistakes are more likely to result in sanctions. You created an account in November 2023, carried out around 30 edits from then to January 2024, then stopped editing for five months. In July 2024, after your account turned seven months old, you have racked up 500 edits. WP:ECR intended for you to have six months of experience, but if we ignore your initial ~30 edits, then you have barely over two weeks of experience on Wikipedia. Clearly, that wasn’t enough for you to learn how things work, but that’s alright actually if you hadn’t jumped into one of the most controversial areas on Wikipedia. Couple that with some signs of argumentative, defensive, or passive aggressive behaviour, it’s not surprising that you have been sanctioned. Gain more experience and listen more. Obviously you think your edits are good, that’s why you made them. Perhaps listen why people have an issue with your edits before turning it into an argument. starship.paint (RUN) 00:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

• Oh, I hadn’t noticed that you already appealed your second topic ban. Certainly a bold choice. The first topic ban should have been enough of a warning. You then performed 21 edits (ranging 3 articles and 1 article talk page) to reach extended confirmed, then within three hours of the first topic ban, you entered ARBPIA. This seems to be part of a pattern, I am not sure if you appreciate the spirit of why the restrictions were put in place. They are meant for you to gain experience so that you do not inadvertently cause disruption or waste editors’ time and efforts. starship.paint (RUN) 00:45, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Seeing not only this editor's contribution pattern but also quite a few others' (e.g., Special:Contributions/Emdosis), I'm getting close to proposing that the 500 edits in CT restrictions should all be mainspace edits, and to at least 50 different articles on top of that. Draftspace play, tweaking own Talk page, or making 70 consecutive edits to a single article (as JoeJShmo did) shouldn't count as sufficient Wikipedia experience. — kashmīrī ^TALK 09:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

@Kashmiri, might be a much simpler proposal that they have 1,000 edits (number can be debated) and 6 months. TarnishedPath^talk 13:34, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Let's not discuss this on the talk page of someone who can't take part, please. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:14, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Exists

Template:Exists has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:04, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Signature Contrast

Hi! It might be helpful to others (especially those with impaired vision) if you darken the color of your signature, or add a darker-colored background behind it, as it's currently very hard to read in light mode. Just a heads up!  miranda :3  01:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up :) JoeJShmo^💌 02:47, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Topic ban

Ian Lustick is covered by that, your edits are very obviously related to the topic. Kindly work on a different topic entirely until you are allowed to edit in this one. nableezy - 04:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey nableezy, I appreciate the polite message. My mistake, I wasn't aware the topic ban would apply to professors who happened to deal with the topic (definitely don't think it obvious!). I wish every message I received was written as civilly as yours. JoeJShmo^💌 08:33, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

It's not just professors who happened to deal with the topic, JoeJShmo, you twice [1] [2] edited a sentence about said professor writing Paradigm Lost: From Two-State Solution to One-State Reality, surely that book would fall under the Israeli-Palestinian conflict topic... In any case, take note that your topic ban is broadly construed. starship.paint (RUN) 14:48, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

I see. If common practice is to construe any edit, even a formatting edit, on any sentence relating to the conflict, as falling under a topic ban, then I'll avoid those edits. JoeJShmo^💌 16:00, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey starship. Copy pasting my message to Doug– Out of an abundance of caution, what's your opinion on an article about an israeli swimmer- do you think that would fall under a topic ban on the Israel-Palestine conflict? Logically, it seems obvious it shouldn't, but common practice on Wikipedia can sometimes defy logic ;) JoeJShmo^💌 18:44, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

If there is a section of the article that discusses the conflict, avoid that section. Otherwise it should be fine. I'd need to see the article to provide a solid response though. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:47, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Depends. This isn't hard, err on the side of caution, if in doubt, don't do it, discretion is the better part of valor, etcetera. Selfstudier (talk) 18:48, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

JJS, topic bans are hard. It's always a good idea to ask an admin, here on your talk where it's okay to ask such questions, to give you advice. As SFR notes, you need to provide a link to the article/section in question. Valereee (talk) 20:02, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Valeree, but I think I got the info I needed. JoeJShmo^💌 20:33, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

If you're referring to your edits at the Andrea Murez article, they look fine with regards to topic ban compliance. I don't see anything on that page related to the ARBPIA topic area, but there could plausibly be some affected content on other Israeli swimmer articles. In particular, if you encounter anything about boycotts, it would be wise to steer clear of that since it's probably related. Left guide (talk) 21:52, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

I just saw the AfD.. thank you.

You actually put a smile on my face. That was he first time anyone has ever acknowledged me in an AfD discussion before. :) 9t5 (talk) 00:56, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome! JoeJShmo^💌 02:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Tban

Your tban and ECR cover comments written anywhere and I have removed those comments that violate the restrictions at HumansRightsIsCool user talk. Selfstudier (talk) 08:52, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't know whether it's common practice to consider giving advice to other editors in following EC guidelines as violating a topic ban, in fact I didn't even consider that a possibility seeing to how illogical that would be, but I strongly suspect it isn't. If you tell me it is, I won't restore my comment, I'll just rewrite it to address your concerns. Also, your raising of ECR is entirely moot as: 1. I am EC and 2. I am under the impression that ECR doesn't apply to user spaces. For the record, I didn't realize the topic ban extended to talk pages, as I assumed that was exempt subject to the same rules as ECR being inapplicable to user space. JoeJShmo^💌 09:07, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

No objection to your giving advice, every objection to your commenting about the conflict, which are the parts I removed. Selfstudier (talk) 09:09, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

No problem. I'll reword that. JoeJShmo^💌 09:13, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Upon further inspection I take issue with the breadth of your removal. I cannot in good faith seriously construe linking the rules of ARB on the conflict and informing the user of the 1RR rule as falling under the spirit of the topic ban. Do you have reason to believe this is common practice or is this your own judgement call. JoeJShmo^💌 09:18, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish: Is my removal reasonable? Selfstudier (talk) 09:22, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I'll take this to mean it was your own judgement call. In the future, I encourage you to ask for advice whether something specific falls under a topic ban before you remove it, not after. JoeJShmo^💌 09:29, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

No, I won't be doing that and I am only doing it now because you are contesting the obvious. Selfstudier (talk) 09:31, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

This hardly qualifies as obvious, but I digress. JoeJShmo^💌 09:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

@Doug Weller @Red-tailed hawk any input? Also, can someone clarify why the practice is apparently to treat such a topic ban as applying to userspace if the Committee thought it logical to exempt userspace from the conflict area in regards to regular PIA restrictions? If this is because of the 'broadly construed' language, I'd ask the same question in regards to why an admin would apply a ban in a wider manner than the Committee generally thought appropriate. JoeJShmo^💌 11:43, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I think it's useful to remember that the principles of general site-wide policies like WP:TBAN are still also in force, and not only ArbCom stuff. We don't get to pick and choose; they all apply. Left guide (talk) 12:12, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

It is bad practice to alter comments that have been replied to, creates a false impression. Selfstudier (talk) 15:41, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Should've struck it. JoeJShmo^💌 15:43, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. That's incredibly deceptive since I wouldn't have replied were it not for the removed material; that's what I was replying to. I've reverted that edit. Please strike it if need be. Left guide (talk) 17:23, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Per WP:BANREVERT, Anyone is free to revert any edits made in violation of a ban or block, without giving any further reason. That said, refactoring other users' comments is generally frowned upon, so it's usually better to simply revert the entire edit rather than to censor specific sentences. @JoeJShmo, it's the umpteenth time you're refusing to get the point, and I fear you're heading towards getting blocked from editing. — kashmīrī ^TALK 09:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

The question here is whether the edit a specific part of the edit was in fact in violation of a ban. And I'm tired of your characterizing normal discussion as refusing to get the point. You've done this countless times; it's unhelpful and stifles discussion. Please stop it. JoeJShmo^💌 10:07, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Violation of a ban and ecr, both. Selfstudier (talk) 10:08, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

You must've missed it above when I told you I am EC. That's never been revoked. JoeJShmo^💌 10:11, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I thought the 1521 edits involved an EC restriction, my apologies. Just a tban breach then. Selfstudier (talk) 10:17, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

It was a topic ban violation. If you continue to violate your topic ban you will be blocked. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:10, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

As I mentioned above, I was not aware that topic bans apply to userspace, as I assumed that was subject to the same exception as ECR. Now I know better. JoeJShmo^💌 10:13, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Also, the question I was discussing with selfstudier was whether the specific sentence linking the ARB rules and the 1RR rule fell under the spirit of the topic ban. Perhaps you can clear that up. JoeJShmo^💌 10:19, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

That makes no sense; WP:ECR makes no exceptions for userspace. Something isn't adding up here. Left guide (talk) 10:29, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

It says it in ARBPIA. See Definition of the "area of conflict". Not sure if this is specifically by PIA and not by all ECR. Either way, I had previously assumed a topic ban in PIA wouldn't be more wide spread than the original area of conflict itself. JoeJShmo^💌 10:39, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

The more I think about it, the more I wonder why the practice here is apparently to treat the breadth of a topic ban as wider than the Committee thought it logical to define in regards to regular PIA restrictions... JoeJShmo^💌 10:47, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

@JoeJShmo you are hereby topic banned from making any edits that relate to the Arab-Israeli conflict (broadly construed) anywhere on Wikipedia.[3] Which part of "anywhere on Wikipedia" you don't understand? Also, a detailed explanation has been linked for you as WP:TBAN – can you please indicate which policy wording there you find unclear? — kashmīrī ^TALK 14:27, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Support

I just looked through all the bullying you have been subjected to from the Wikipedia gestapo, and want to commend your incredible ability to keep your cool. Bravo. I was threatened today with an AE, and fixed my rant (I admit it was a rant) to hopefully comply with the bizarre restrictions that are unequally enforced. Stay strong and brave. DaringDonna (talk) 20:07, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! It's nice to see a friendly face in this cold place. I just took a look at your edit history- I'm impressed by what you've managed to do. Very accurate description of what I've been put up against. The hypocrisy and double standards are hardly even subtle. "Eisav soneh es yaakov"- they'll never let us forget it. I saw one of them who said a contributor was 'POV' on Israel... because "he's Jewish". They're shameless. And by the way, I love your user page. JoeJShmo^💌 20:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you about my user page. I was inspired by an interview Michael Rapaport had with Bari Weiss. His stand up shows have been cancelled because of threats of violence against him because of his views, and perhaps also because he is Jewish. I thought, if he can be brave like that, and pay the price, maybe I can do something small like make a meaningful user page. BTW, I am being stalked. I had a slightly threatening visit on my talk page from Nableezy, who asked me to explain what I meant by "Wikipedia Gestapo," which I mentioned here. I did not know I had to explain myself to anyone in private conversations I might have on talk pages. I told him it was obviously just a joke. Everyone knows Wikipedia is the free-est, most democratic and open forum for discovering the truth. Stay well. DaringDonna (talk) 18:18, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Wow. Kudos to Barry Weiss and to others like him. Mattisyahu comes to mind, his shows also got canceled because he's pro Israel. It seems to be a common tactic of that side to stifle dissenting speech and shut down voices they don't like. I suppose the truth hurts; it can be scary to realize how sad it is that one has filled the vacuum of meaning in their life with a fallacious cause who's roots can often be traced back to common anti-Semitism. And your last sentence made me lol! All the best, don't lose heart. The truth is on our side, after all.

(btw, I see one of the stalkers of my talk page already replied to you. I removed his comment. He somehow managed to completely mischaraterize what you were saying; he's done the same to me many times. Just ignore him.) JoeJShmo^💌 22:19, 28 July 2024 (UTC)