User talk:Piz d'Es-Cha

Piz da la Margna

Thanks for your correction! Ericoides (talk) 09:45, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Fly-by tagging'

Hello, and thanks for your message on my Talk page. I understand that you feel I'm not being useful and turning Wikipedia into 'a big mess' by simply adding tags to articles rather than correcting their problems. While I accept that it may not be very useful, I believe my behaviour is supported by policy. One of the founding pillars of Wikipedia, Wikipedia:Verifiability, makes clear that all theoretically contentious material added to Wikipedia must be sourced. I accept that I was probably over-hasty in adding the 'unreferenced' tag to the various Alps articles - none of the material there is 'likely to be challenged'. But, at least in theory, it should all be sourced.

We have these policies for a reason (to stop people adding anything they like to Wikipedia), and the templates exist for a reason too: to draw attention to an article that does not meet with Wikipedia's policies or guidelines and needs somehow to be corrected. Yes, it would be better to correct it myself, but I can't always do that, and I feel adding a template such as {{Unreferenced}} (which adds the article to Category:Articles lacking sources) is better than doing nothing.

I'm sorry we disagree on this, but I don't intend to stop the 'fly-by tagging', as you call it. (Although I'm happy to stay away from certain areas, like the articles on the Alps, if you so wish.) If you continue to feel my behaviour is unacceptable, I suggest you file a request for comment at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct. Thanks for reading, and happy editing. Terraxos (talk) 04:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see your point. It looks like I have been a bit too over-aggressive in my tagging. I apologise for placing unnecessary templates on those articles, and from now on I will only use the 'unreferenced' template when I see something in an article I think is actually factually incorrect, or at least open to question. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Terraxos (talk) 01:46, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Zutphen Railway Station'

I do not believe that my statement that Zutphen has a 'small railway station' is false. Have you been there? It only has two platforms. Fair enough it has trains to other cities with larger railway stations but this hardly classes it as 'an important regional railway station'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.195.47.157 (talk) 10:58, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Although I'm not the one who made the comment or edit referred to above,Zutphen railway station is not a large station, bit not a small station either. It might have 2 physucal platforms, but in NL the use tracks, ans a platform has often 2 sides; thus in Zp there are 3 tracks.

Also, because moast trains departing from (and arriving at) Zp are not very long they double-use track 1 and 3 often double, eq. Apeldoorn train uses track 3A and the Winterswijk train might use 3B. (all Dutch railway tracks (the term used comp. to platfrrm I mean and not the physical track the train runs on - as there are tracks bypassing any platform) use A and B to divide the tracks). In Zutphen they actively use this division on track 1 and 3 all the time. This results in that within a few minutes 5 to 6 trains depart (in different directions). On normal working days twice an hour 6 trains depart in diff. directions within 8 or 9 minutes; thus 12 trains an hour.

If you take this number of dep and arr trains as a measurement for calling a station small or not Zp isn't a small station but a quite important (regional) station for switching trains. (in Dutch: Overstapstation). (And to answer your Q directly about having been there: yes, just today; and use it often). Greetz, --JanT (talk) 16:45, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kollel

As I have wrote in the talk page many months ago (but was ignored) that the Kollel idea was coined for Yishuv haYashan but the whole history of those kollelim is missing. Also the name has nothing to do with the medern sence, it has no relation to Yeshiva Beth Medrash etc. but with the organization which took care about ALL the needs of its members. Please write me if you got the massage.HagiMalachi (talk) 22:42, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Important

I'm sure you are, or you once were, a proud citizen of the old town of Zutphen, but why are you so much stressing the importance of its railway station? It is a relatively small station, and less 'important' than nearby Arnhem, Nijmegen, Deventer or Apeldoorn. There's only one main line, Zwolle-Roosendaal, and for the rest there's only a number of 'boemeltjes' or local trains. Glatisant (talk) 14:17, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Piz d'Es-Cha, I'm moving this subject to the talk page of Zutphen - I should have done that from the start. Glatisant (talk) 15:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

three revert rule

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Haredi Judaism. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 15:29, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No personal attacks

Hi! Please take a chance to review our No personal attacks and civility policies. These policies are critical to our being able to function, particularly in areas that are sources of religious and other disagreements and difficulties. Please temper your comments at Talk:Haredi Judaism and elsewhere. Thank you for your understanding. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 15:48, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Proper English

I disagree. Hezbollah has various branches, and it's hardly up to us to decide who their leadership is without a source. For the record, Hezbollah's leadership is generally viewed to be embedded in its religious branch, not its political one. I've replaced the term leader with official, as that's the term the source uses.

Regarding your incivility, please note that there is no "rule" against using warning templates for even the most experienced of users when they violate Wikipedia policies. Furthermore, an editor who has made 200 edits over the course of four months is not considered to be an experienced editor in my book. Lastly, I would note that you and I have had discussions before using the English language, so I view your remark as more of a personal attack than sagely advice, and I'll thank you to keep such remarks to yourself. ← George^[talk] 08:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, please just be more considerate with your edit summaries in the future. ← George^[talk] 00:08, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Civility and Talk:Haredi Judaism

It's fine to explain why you disagree with someone, but using phrases like "laughable nonsense" doesn't help get your point across and turn others off. Please take a moment to review Wikipedia's Civility policy. Discussing disagreements civilly is very important to Wkipedia because we can lose volunteers if we allow people to attack them. I've already given you a warning a couple of weeks ago. Please be very careful about what you say. Incivility can lead to loss of editing privileges. We take this very seriously. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 20:13, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Zionism here

Sorry: I haven't a clue what you wrote: I don't know Yiddish. Anyway 'a'bigezunt' and Shavua Tov (BTW: Suggest you open an account so your computer address won't be traced). Shir-El too 09:41, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: anti Zionist sects

hi, I am happy to see someone revert me, even though i have explained very very clearly that those three subjects are not in essence more opposed to Zionism than all other hariedy frum Jewish subjects, and yet u reverted it in silence- i guess its better than not reverting at all, after all we need each other here and u are appreciated tremedously.

why do u feel they r more opposed to Zionism than all other hareidy sects. i suppose dushinsky may be in the eidah they arent officially taking money from the israeli government buth pupe and shomer emunim arnt even in the eidah except toldos ahron and toldos avraham yitschuk which are indeed in the eida.

I suppose we make 3 separate articles from shomrei emunim, so 2 will go into the anti cat.

anyways i hope to hear from u soon.

OK i thank u for helping to form the truth, it lies somewhere in the middle of us 2--YY (talk) 15:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

also the crc article please dont tag it anti because we already gone through that discussion on the talk page: being that the crc is merely a satmar org it doesn't help for the truths sake to over inflate the anti Zionist cat with all satmar orgs. unless u think that the crc is something more than satmar which i disagree.--YY (talk) 16:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i understand very well yiddish, please be so kind and talk to me in calm cool way, i except and understand that u don't have to much time to talk as u say u work 40 houres a week, we can wait but in the end of the day hopefully we will reach a solution. My main concern u should not over inflate all eidah and neture karte and satmar orgs and people in the Zionism cat. the eidah is comprised of 15 wiki articles and subjects it has no sense to list them all in the zionist cat if the are already in the eidah cat. hope to hear a answer from u. thanks. yours truly--YY (talk) 14:17, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meshulach/Mechulah

I see your pain, but dont understand it. It is a very common custom in scholarly article to romanize a "ח" to a "H" with a dot beneath, although is not common today and I dont know how to type it. You can see this for example in the "Jewish Encyclopedia" as well as in the many article cited herein. There should be special regulation about spellings of Hebrew Romanizations in the Wikipedia.

All the best - HagiMalachi (talk) 19:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mosad Keren Hatzole

Piz d'Es-Cha, Please see my reply to your comment on the Talk Page of Mosad Keren Hatzole. Kol tuv, Shirulashem (talk) 13:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

Hi Piz d'Es-Cha! Thank you very much for the positive comments on the RfA, which passed today :) Much appreciated. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 20:56, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Square

Please see the talk page. WhisperToMe (talk) 13:04, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:New_Square,_New_York#Bill_Clinton_controversy_and_the_blanket_revert - I am requesting that my version is to be restored, and then THAT can be worked upon. Please notice the proper footnotes, etc.

Also, generally it is a good idea to not use "controversy" sections - work the controversy throughout the article. WhisperToMe (talk) 13:08, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I found a source stating that the investigators closed the investigation with no action. WhisperToMe (talk) 14:55, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Want to make New Square into a Good Article?

I found lots of great sources about New Square. Do you want to help me improve the article and turn it into a Good Article?

I'll ask the school district for zoning maps so I know where New Square is assigned to school, even though I know most Hasidic children do not go to public school (I know that in NYC some disabled Hasidic kids go to public) WhisperToMe (talk) 09:08, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 2008

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Your edit summary on Orthodox Judaism, here, was out of line. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 17:11, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Abortion

I believe you made a gross misrepresentation of the halacha on the Haredi talk page. While I may be mistaken, please be very, very careful as to how you describe the halachic reasonings, as misrepresentation can be a major problem. Please e-mail me if you wish to respond. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 21:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beitar Illit

Re this edit summary:

"need I remind you of WP:3RR, mister who so loves the rules?" [1]

Did you revert to a problematic version solely to remind me about WP:3RR, in a quite uncivil manner at that? MeteorMaker (talk) 22:43, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moshe Yaalon

Hi - a number of articles from this particular website were added to various articles by a user. Whilst some of them are OK to use (for instance, if they were written by the subject of the actual article), most are opinion pieces and unsuitable for use in such articles. See also this. Thanks, Black Kite 19:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are a few problems, though. Whilst there's nothing wrong with this particular article, apart from the title it isn't really about Holocaust Remembrance Day. Some of the other pieces urge the killing of Hamas leaders, refer to "the Islamofascist Alliance", or allege that people or groups have "fallen into an Arab propaganda trap". But the important thing is that they are opinion pieces, and as such illustrate the writer's opinion, as opposed to a neutral viewpoint. We should uphold WP:NPOV in external links as well as in articles. Black Kite 19:46, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moishe Sternbuch

שלום אליכם.

For better or for worse, on wikipedia, the operative mode is not אמת but מראת מקומות. Or, in English, verifiability, not truth. The sentence "He strongly opposes the Zionist State of Israel and was against its establishment," may well be true, as we know how the עדה החרדית feels about Zionism. HOWEVER, we still have to bring reliable and verifiable sources for anything in wikipedia, ESPECIALLY those that relate to living people. Consider it דינא דמלכותא דינא :). Thank you for understanding and have a גוט שבת. -- Avi (talk) 19:18, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, while logical, wikipedia still requires you to bring a source, because it is not common knowledge. That an Orthodox Jew does not eat on Yom HaKippurim IS common knowledge; that members of the Edah are individually and collectively anti-Zionist is not. It should be easy to find a source, please do so. Thank you, and a gut voch. -- Avi (talk) 01:02, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

תוכחה

איך בין מוחה shirulashem (talk) 02:06, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haredi Judaism

יישר כך for handling this civilly. לפי עניות דעתי, we need to move in this direction of being "civil" more often. ;-) shirulashem (talk) 11:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mendel Grosman

I appreciate your bringing this matter to my attention, though I suggest you reread your remarks to see how the tone can be read as flippant and offensive (and be so considerate as to keep that out of any future communications with me and other Wikipedia editors with whom you've yet to establish a dialogue). The Ghetto Fighters' House—in whose Archives I work as a translator and editor—holds a collection of MG's prewar artworks (primarily pencil sketches) with his signature, the source of the revised "one-s" spelling. This was unknown to my predecessors who were involved in publishing several editions of his renowned photographs of the Lodz ghetto. The drawings, along with his prewar photographs of the Habima Theatre visit to Lodz, were the subject of a recent (and recently closed) temporary exhibition at the GFH Miriam Novitch Art Gallery, which was our opportunity to study MG's signature. As I'm responsible for maintaining the romanized spellings of keywords on the GFH online archive, I made the change there and in our texts. The matter apparently bears further investigation, which I will undertake as soon as time permits. When our office reopens after the holiday, I'll install our data base program's equivalent of a redirect so that visitors to the online archive searching on the keyword Grossman Mendel will get to the 70 items available there. I'll have to think of a solution for text searches. But as MG has no mainspace article and—aside from inconsistencies on the paltry few mentions on other pages—what does this have to do with Wikipedia?-- Deborahjay (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How nice! (Wat leuk!)

Yes, I too am a former Dutch, religious Jew. Former in the sense that I live in Israel nowadays, although I am still a Dutch citizen.

I was happy to see the dispute resolved, and my personal opinion is that it was resolved correctly in form and in content as well.

Yes, the template about atheism is what causes that contradictory category in my userpage. I noticed this, but left it to the intelligent viewer to understand what had transpired. You have proven to be such an intelligent viewer. Congratulations. Debresser (talk) 22:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for Satmar article

Putting the location of where you can find a source in the edit summary, as you did here, is not how to cite sources. Please read through the citing sources guideline and follow proper procedure. Additionally, it's important to remember how to use edit summaries correctly. As per policy, "Once it is clear that there is a dispute, avoid relying solely on edit summaries: discuss the matter on the article talk page. The primary venue for discussing the dispute should be the article talk page, which is where a reviewing admin will look for evidence of trying to settle the dispute." -shirulashem^(talk) 13:11, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Ultra-Orthodox" in Haredi article (courtesy note)

FYI, I removed the content in Haredi Judaism that claimed that "Ultra-Orthodox" is pejorative. I have explained my reasons on the talk page. -shirulashem^(talk) 15:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Civility, please

With all due respect, please try to keep comments civil. I assume it was not your intention, but I take someone calling my comments "yellow journalism" to be uncivil and condescending. Please take a look at the dispute resolution policies and, in particular, the policy to keep your comments focused on content. -shirulashem^(talk) 13:56, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfC Haredi or Ultra-Orthodox

Please add your comment to Talk:Modi'in Illit#Ultra-Orthodox.2FHaredi. Thanks, --Shuki (talk) 21:55, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yosef Chaim Zonnenfeld

Hey Piz, as an answer to your question: Yes, there was more the one Haredi Jewish community in Jerusalem during the period of the British Mandate. (notice that the term 'Haredi' then included all the religious people, also the people who called today Religious Zionism). The main religious community of Jerusalem was after the leadership of Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook and Rabbi Tzvi Pesach Frank, the Ashkenazi Chief Rabbinates of Jerusalem from 1921 to 1961. Edah HaChareidis was only the secondary Ashkenazi religious community, from then to nowdays. There is alwayas a large amount of Disinformation about this subject, but it is importabnt to know the truth. Cheers, Netanel h (talk) 12:52, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is not quite true. Not even nearly. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 15:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think so? Netanel h (talk) 21:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If the owner will forgive me, I will just mention that there is a confusion in the word "Haredi". At one time the word did indeed simply mean Orthodox, as I pointed out in the Haredi Judaism page. But there was certainly a split between those who accepted Zionism and those who did not, as there is today. One gets into historical confusion - for example, at one time there were Zionist Chassidic Rebbes, such as the founded of Kfar Chasidim and Kiryat Ata, the town to my north. Were they Haredi? I would say not, but others would say yes.Mzk1 (talk) 18:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, Piz D'escha, do you really think I was out of line? I hate this sort of bickering; you can see I waited a week between postings. But knowing the Israeli press, I know there will always be enough "reliable" sources to provide fuel to anyone who cannot neutralize his own bias because he doesn't believe he has one. I would also like more facts. I have asked several times to see the B'Gatz decision, which I understand contradicts many news reports. Do you have any idea where one can get it? (And believe me, I have no intention of being the first to post on this.)Mzk1 (talk) 18:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good points - I'm not s sure either. I don't know where to obtain the actual court ruling either. What you mention about sources is correct - in the end, we just need common sense. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 07:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Third Intifada for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Third Intifada, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Third Intifada until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Marokwitz (talk) 08:24, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mishnah rabbis

Do you mind commenting at Category:Mishnah rabbis? Thanks. Chesdovi (talk) 22:56, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on the Eida article

I left some questions about your recent edits (more the implications than the contents) at the Eidah article. Actually, only the first question is your edit. (P.S. I live in Israel; Shabbos is over here.)Mzk1 (talk) 19:39, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, again. Are you in Israel?Mzk1 (talk) 22:14, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, recently moved to the UK - I was in Jerusalem until Pesach, then moved to the UK. And you? .. Oh, yeah, in Israel. :) --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 22:16, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See my user page also, updated for the first time in 3 years. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 22:41, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Haredi-secular conflict in Israel in winter of 2011-2012 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Haredi-secular conflict in Israel in winter of 2011-2012 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haredi-secular conflict in Israel in winter of 2011-2012 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.. IZAK (talk) 19:48, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Socio-religious tensions in Israel article improvements

I've posted the following on the AfD discussion page for the article, per the improvements you have made to the article:

"*Important Note – This article has been renamed to Socio-religious tensions in Israel, and User:Piz d'Es-Cha has added an under construction tag to the article and has performed some significant expansions to the article (Example: Difference between revisions, 4 January 2012). It would be appropriate for this AfD to be delayed/relisted while improvements are being made to the article."

—Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:03, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DO NOT MOVE while in the middle of AfD

Please DO NOT MOVE while in the middle of AfD! Please do not change the title or move the original article while it is in the middle of an AfD as it creates mass confusion. Feel free to edit, but no moving and no changing of name until AfD is resolved and closed. Thank you! IZAK (talk) 04:32, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Haredi-secular conflict in Israel in winter of 2011-2012

The article may be deleted, so you may want to userfy the article (keep a copy on your user page). There's a lot of delete !votes in the AfD. By saving a copy, you can further edit and refine it, and then there are several routes to take. For example, you can check out articles for creation and receive input from other users prior to publishing the article. This is way to achieve consensus prior to publishing an article on Wikipedia. AfD may not be the best place to receive the best input for a topic that may be perceived by others as controversial. Anyway, happy editing! Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:42, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

True. I've already taken a couple of backups of different versions. Thanks! --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 16:14, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Old Yishuv

Hello Piz d'Es-Cha, Thank you for the links you sent to me. What I'm looking for is not about the history of the old yishuv at the period of old yishuv; I mean, those who consisted the old yishuv in the past had sons and grandsons who live today in Isarel (or maybe also in other parts of the world). I want to know more about their social communities nowadays. in which cities ther are, their numbers, their customs, their religion branches (I assume they are living in Tiberias and Safed, but I may be wrong). I found this article in Wikipedia Edah HaChareidis where you can see: "The Edah HaChareidis is viewed as a continuation of the former leaders of the Yishuv haYashan". But when you read more, you have the impression that they mean "the political continuation of the old yishuv" but not necessarily their descendants; in the addition the article is talking about the Edah HaChareidis as an orgnization that any one having the same ideology can enter in this organization (like some immigrants members of Agudat Yisrael in the french article). You can find more easily informations about the nowadays communities in Israel of the descendants of the turkish jews or romanian jews than the descendants of the old yishuv. One thing that I had found is "Sabra community", but again this term which apparently has several definitions, none of them is exactly the "descendants of the old yishuv", at the best it's for any one who was born in Israel before 1948 and his descendants; so it includes some of the new yishuv who, even if his father was born outside then immigrate, he himself was born inside israel before 1948. Thank you again for any help you can give (sources or even informations that you know without sources). --3Princip (talk) 19:50, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

JAL ticketing office at Ishigaki

The reason I listed it is because it is the only noteworthy economic operation I know of on that island that is sourced. If one has more information, one could get a fuller picture of the economic activity on the island. More minute details belong in articles about small communities or neighborhoods of larger cities, while such details would not belong to articles about larger cities. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:58, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sagiv Cohen (musician)

Hello, Piz d'Es-Cha. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Sagiv Cohen (musician), for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Sagiv Cohen (musician) to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks, DJAMP4444 (talk) 14:38, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orthodox Council of Jerusalem

[2], [3], I can link to more if you want. AddMore-III (talk) 08:07, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Piz d'Es-Cha. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Piz d'Es-Cha. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Piz d'Es-Cha. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]