User talk:Dovidroth

Archives

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

You are topic banned from the Palestine/Israel conflict, broadly construed, for 90 days.

You have been sanctioned for WP:BATTLEGROUND editing.[1][2][3][4][5][6]

This sanction 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. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:15, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Motion: PIA Canvassing

Hello Dovidroth,

There are currently motions at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions § Motions: PIA Canvassing regarding an ongoing effort by one or more banned editors to canvass discussions within the Israel-Palestine topic area and asking for proxy edits to promote a pro-Israel point of view.

One of the motions proposes indefinitely banning you from the English Wikipedia for participation in the effort. Statements and evidence submissions are welcome at the above link, or by email to arbcom-enwikimedia.org if information cannot be posted publicly.

For the Arbitration Committee,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:12, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The current ban from the Palestine/Israel conflict should not prevent you from responding to this invitation, at very least not from discussing your own behavior in response to a motion about banning you (WP:BANEX). ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:19, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration motion regarding PIA Canvassing

The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:

Since at least October 2023, there has been an ongoing effort by one or more banned editors to canvass discussions within the Israel-Palestine topic area and asking for proxy edits to promote a pro-Israel point of view. Based on the evidence received by the Committee, the following discussions have been targeted:

The Arbitration Committee would like to thank the editors who reported canvassing. If editors have any additional canvassing evidence, please bring it to the Committee's attention. The Arbitration Committee asks the Wikimedia Foundation for assistance creating technical measures to prevent the ongoing abuse.

Based on information from the checkuser tool and on information received, the Committee determines that Dovidroth (talk · contribs) most likely participated in discussions due to canvassing and made proxy edits for a banned editor. As a result, they are indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. This ban may be appealed immediately after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

Based on information from the checkuser tool and on information received, the Committee determines that Dovidroth (talk · contribs) most likely made proxy edits for a banned editor. As a result, they are indefinitely topic banned from making edits related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed immediately after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

Based on information from the checkuser tool and on information received, the Committee determines that EytanMelech (talk · contribs) most likely made proxy edits for a banned editor. As a result, he is indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. This ban may be appealed immediately after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

Based on information from the checkuser tool and on information received, the Committee determines that EytanMelech (talk · contribs) most likely made proxy edits for a banned editor. As a result, they are indefinitely topic banned from making edits related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed immediately after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

Based on information from the checkuser tool and on information received, the Committee determines that Homerethegreat (talk · contribs) most likely participated in discussions due to canvassing and made proxy edits for a banned editor. As a result, they are indefinitely topic banned from making edits related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed immediately after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

For the Arbitration Committee, Aoidh (talk) 15:48, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Arbitration motion regarding PIA Canvassing

Arbitration motion regarding PIA Canvassing (Dovidroth)

The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:

Based on information from the checkuser tool and on information received, the Committee determines that Dovidroth (talk · contribs) most likely participated in discussions due to canvassing and made proxy edits for a banned editor. As a result, they are indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. This ban may be appealed immediately after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

Based on information from the checkuser tool and on information received, the Committee determines that Dovidroth (talk · contribs) most likely made proxy edits for a banned editor. As a result, they are indefinitely topic banned from making edits related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed immediately after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

For the Arbitration Committee, Aoidh (talk) 16:36, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Arbitration motion regarding PIA Canvassing

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Dovidroth. Thank you for your work on Yom le-yabbashah. North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 17:14, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #87220

@Aoidh: This user is at UTRS. How should I direct them? Maybe they can email the Committee. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:53, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra: Dovidroth can email the appeal to arbcom-en

wikimedia.org. - Aoidh (talk) 21:10, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:33, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dovidroth unbanned

Following a successful appeal of his site ban to the Arbitration Committee, Dovidroth (talk · contribs) is unbanned. The topic ban, which was passed at the same time as the site ban, remains in force.

Support: Barkeep49, Guerillero, HJ Mitchell, Maxim, Primefac, Sdrqaz, ToBeFree

Oppose: Firefly, Moneytrees

For the Arbitration Committee, Maxim (talk) 15:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Dovidroth unbanned

Bar Kokhba

Hi Dovid!
I see you've been contributing a lot about the Bar Kokhba revolt. I'm wondering if you'd be willing to contribute at all to Split of Christianity and Judaism. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 18:31, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll try to take a look when I have a chance. Dovidroth (talk) 06:01, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RAMBI (Index of Articles on Jewish Studies) moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to RAMBI (Index of Articles on Jewish Studies). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:39, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the incorrect message. The article is cited, but it needs more sources to establish notability according to Wikipedia's guidelines. Those sources should bereliable and independent. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Rabbinic period

Hello! Your submission of Rabbinic period 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) and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Flibirigit (talk) 18:10, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Flibirigit. Thank you very much for your review. I have worked on a modified hook and few other things that might fit your comments, but I am unsure where to post them ... Do they somewhere in the original template (if so, where?) or in a new template? Thanks. Dovidroth (talk) 11:35, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment at your nomination's entry instead of your personal talk page. Place new comments after the current review/discussion. Flibirigit (talk) 11:38, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Rabbinic period

On 21 September 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rabbinic period, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Rabbinic period was foundational in the ongoing development of Judaism and its traditions? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rabbinic period. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Rabbinic period), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:03, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	For your impressive work on Rabbinic period. Andre🚐 18:19, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Dovidroth (talk) 04:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women and the shofar

In this edit you added this text: "generally, Ashkenazic women recite a blessing and Sephardic women do now." The last word, "now", sounds unusual here, since it sounds like it's contrasting with something, but the article doesn't mention anything about Sephardic women previously not reciting blessings. Is this a typo for "not"? I won't change it, in case it's intentional. 123.51.107.94 (talk) 02:07, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing it out. This was my typo and I fixed it. Dovidroth (talk) 06:21, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recitation of Elohekhem

Chag sameach. This edit adds a claim about the recitation of some, but not all of the Elohekhem piyyutim at KAJ. The statement is added inside a reference, but couldn't be from the reference itself, which was written long before KAJ was established. Shouldn't this statement be in the article itself and shouldn't it have its own source? Alansohn (talk) 13:50, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note, and sorry for my delayed response. I added a source about KAJ. I still think that it can go in the footnote, as it is simply to demonstrate that there are communities that recite some, but not all of the piyyutim. If you feel that it needs to go in the body of the article, feel free to move it. Dovidroth (talk) 06:42, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:41, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Kiddush levana

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kiddush levana you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of ProfGray -- ProfGray (talk) 20:01, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Not sure why the bot did it this way (above). Your work on the article is appreciated and it has improved the article. But the article is not ready for GA and so it did not pass. Please don't hesitate to comment on the review page. Best wishes, ProfGray (talk) 20:13, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Kiddush levana

The article Kiddush levana you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Kiddush levana for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of ProfGray -- ProfGray (talk) 20:24, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]