User talk:SoaringLL

A belated welcome![edit]

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, SoaringLL! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to insert your username and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! Loopy30 (talk) 14:40, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ARBPIA[edit]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

nableezy - 16:28, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ehud Olmert[edit]

Please look at the date on this image before further engaging in edit warring. Nonstopmaximum (talk) 03:05, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. Good catch. It's the picture taken with Shahar Pe'er in February 2007. I don't understand why they wrote in caption "2017". Maybe that was the date the file was uploaded, not when the picture was taken. I'll revert myself.--SoaringLL (talk) 21:52, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Economy of Israel[edit]

Apologies SoaringLL, I made an error on my edit on Economy of Israel. I was trying to revert Govercon, who was a wp:sockpuppet (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ineedtostopforgetting), but inadvertently reverted you instead. I note you have previously reverted them their edits on this page, so I suspect I clicked the wrong diff. Please feel free to restore the content they removed again, as you did prior. Best, CMD (talk) 02:38, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV Neutral point of view[edit]

Hello, I'm Timpo. I noticed that you recently removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.

I reply in some length and with far too many links because, for me personally, impartiality is vital, and Wikipedia has issued guidelines which require neutrality. I hope you have the time and patience to consider my objection to your reversion of my edit of Politics_of_the_Palestinian_National_Authority#Political_developments_since_1993. and your somewhat emotive, rather than factual edit summary, which reads:

POV crap, badly sourced and badly written, unrelated to topic in article

I rather think that there may have been at least more than the single political development mentioned in the almost three decades? I would agree that Benjamin Netanyahu has somewhat ignored the problem for some long time, but that does not mean ther has been no developments at all.

Neutrality implies distinguishing fair legal criticism (supported in linked articles) of specific policies the government of Israel from the wide generalisation of characterising any such critical commentary as illegal antisemitism.

That confusion may perhaps arise from its constitution, in which Israel defines itself as a Jewish and democratic state and the nation state of the Jewish people, which would suggest (incorrectly) that gentiles are not entitled to human rights protection afforded ethnic Israeli nationals.

Antisemitism is racism, and is unlawful discrimination because it legitimises unfair collective punishment.

In bombing Gaza, the Israeli government may be coming uncomfortably close to committing just such a crime by implicitly demonising all Palestinians in Gaza as terrorists.

It seems to me to be seriously unwise for Israel to ignore the United Nations and for the USA to veto those resolutions, because the sustained assaults on press installations and the Red Cresent are likely to fuel extreme anger in the citizens of (essentially Christian and mostly Islamic-tolerant) Western capitals.

We have already seen street protesters confusing Judaism (which is pacifist in nature) with assertive Zionism and the explicitly anti-Palestinian oratory of Benjamin Netanyahu plus of course the belligerent Government policies which order the deployment extreme lethal force, killing hundreds of civilians in revenge for rocket attacks by Hamas which caused dozens of deaths.

To many, this apparent mortality imbalance looks extremely disproportionate, more like bullying than the application of the rule of law. Conversly,if I may suggest that is wrong because, Every person is a piece of humanity, A part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, then the continent is the less.

Violence begets violence. Or, as a rather notable first century Rabbi allegedly suggested those who live by the sword, die by the sword - so should the descendants of the refugees of Siege of Jerusalem (70 CE) and the survivors of the The Holocaust learn from their successful survival from violence by divine stoicism or should they try to imitate the disastrous human cruelty of their erstwhile (and now extinct) oppressors?

Is it not possible that to revenge is human, to forgive divine? or is that just my personal POV crap?- Timpo (talk) 10:45, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Triggerhippie4, user:Gidonb, user:SoaringLL[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Catchpoke (talk) 03:34, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring - warning both users involved[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Jeppiz (talk) 11:43, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unexplained?[edit]

The reason for the quote from Herzl in the introductory paragraph in the Zionism article is because it illustrates the Zionist position on the connection of the Jewish people to the Jewish State as "the ever-memorable historic home." As a key point in Zionism, it should appear in the introductory paragraph. UClaudius (talk) 06:00, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I left the part that says "on the basis of a long Jewish connection and attachment to that land." That's clear and more than enough for the opening sentence of article. SoaringLL (talk) 06:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

1rr[edit]

That was a violation at Islamization of Jerusalem. Please dont do that again. nableezy - 00:24, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since you have been notified of the ARBPIA restrictions, you should know that they apply to portions of articles related to the Arab-Israeli conflict and not only to complete articles. It follows that your second revert at Damascus Gate in less than 24 hours was a violation of the 1RR restriction. I invite you to self-revert to avoid the possibility of being reported. Zero^talk 12:01, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My first revert was against an IP that is not even allowed to edit in ARBPIA, so it doesnt count. SoaringLL (talk) 13:37, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are correct. Zero^talk 01:42, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Violations of Wikipedia policy[edit]

If you continue to change Arab citizens of Israel to Israeli Arab: expect to see yourself reported. Btw; I was reported for using what was a redir (see User_talk:Huldra#Violations_of_Wikipedia_policy): and "what is good for the goose, is good for the gander". Cheers, Huldra (talk) 21:34, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 2021[edit]

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.

TonyBallioni (talk) 03:29, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:יניב הורון per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/יניב הורון. 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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~TNT (she/her • talk) 22:45, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]