User talk:TommyMaoz

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 an expanded level of powers and discretion 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 practices;
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.

Helpful Raccoon (talk) 04:27, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Please be careful not to violate NPOV, as here. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jewish_pogrom_in_Amsterdam&diff=next&oldid=1256104147 184.153.21.19 (talk) 07:29, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your deletion of "terrorist" in the first sentence

here .. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_Alexandria_bombing&diff=prev&oldid=1256103215

Why?

It is amply supported in the text below the lede. The ref need not be in the lede itself. 184.153.21.19 (talk) 07:37, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Level 2 warning

For this. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jewish_pogrom_in_Amsterdam&action=edit&undoafter=1256109635&undo=1256110104 184.153.21.19 (talk) 08:01, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Helpful Raccoon - as you have visited this editor, and User: Liz - as you are protecting the parallel page - please keep an eye on this editing pattern which is worsening. Thanks. --184.153.21.19 (talk) 08:03, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Level 3 warning

You have added text with a ref, but there is nothing in the ref about the Israeli team being "humiliated," etc. .. this is also with the above very much NPOV vandalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jewish_pogrom_in_Amsterdam&diff=prev&oldid=1256113491 184.153.21.19 (talk) 08:17, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2024

Your recent editing history at Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. TiggerJay (talk) 08:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TommyMaoz please see my reply to your message over at User_talk:184.153.21.19 TiggerJay (talk) 09:09, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 01:16, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]