User talk:Szirtyu

Welcome!

Hello, Szirtyu, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Yahwism does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Questions page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Help pages
Tutorial
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! tgeorgescu (talk) 16:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

Welcome to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, content you added to Yahwism appears to be a minority or fringe viewpoint, and appears to have given undue weight to this minority viewpoint, and has been reverted. To maintain a neutral point of view, an idea that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight in an article about a mainstream idea. Feel free to use the article's talk page to discuss this, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. tgeorgescu (talk) 16:51, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not insert fringe or undue weight content into articles, as you did to Yahwism. An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. Please use the article's talk page to discuss the material and its appropriate weight within the article. Thank you. tgeorgescu (talk) 16:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi tgeorgescu,

thank you for your comment,

the reason I had made the edit is that I do not find this to be a fringe view, rather my understanding is that Yahwism existed in both a monotheistic and polytheistic state, and I felt that Yahwism, understood as the monotheistic faith of the Israelites in the Hebrew Bible was not represented in the article. Szirtyu (talk) 17:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Szirtyu! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of an article several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Dorsetonian (talk) 16:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dorsetonian,

thank you for your comment,

in this instance, as the same user had reverted my edit twice, and the reason given (that my sources did not support my argument) was not true, i had reverted to express this in the edit summary.

i will use the talk page to resolve matters in future.Szirtyu (talk) 17:11, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.gotquestions.org/ is not a reliable source. tgeorgescu (talk) 16:58, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

perhaps not, but the other 6 sources i provided were.

i added this source because it defines monotheistic Yahwism in a clear and concise way.

if one source is considered not reliable, I don’t think that is a reason to discredit my edit, as that is only one of the sources I used Szirtyu (talk) 17:18, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have WP:CITEd several bad sources, and several good sources. The problem with the good sources is WP:CHERRYPICKING, i.e. making them say what they really deny or doubt. Also, your citations are sloppy, e.g. no page numbers for papers spinning across tens of pages. Asking me to read 300-400 pages in order to check whether your sources WP:V your claim is not done. tgeorgescu (talk) 15:17, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Karaynn per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Karaynn. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 14:32, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]