User talk:קריצ'ר

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 special powers 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 practice;
• 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.

M.Bitton (talk) 12:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

I didn't edit such an article, i edited a TALK PAGE. What you have written don't apply to talk pages. לידך, בלעדייך (talk) 07:17, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi לידך, בלעדייך! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Regarding this, as an editor without the extended confirmed privilege, you are not entitled to engage in consensus forming discussions. You can make an edit request. You have done that. Your request appears to have been declined, so there is nothing more for you to do there. Sean.hoyland (talk) 03:57, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Sean.hoyland How much time does it take to determine whether my request was declined or not? How much time does it take for a discussion? Isn't it about a week? Surely more than a few minutes with one editor! I have interest in the article, but to "do" it depends if the discussion about my request continues or not. לידך, בלעדייך (talk) 05:04, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

There's no discussion phase or designated time window. That kind of collaborative process is not available to non-extended confirmed user in the WP:PIA topic area. There is an edit request from a non-EC user and a response from an EC user. The response may be a request for clarification, and you can certainly provide that. There's no dependency on your interests. Your interest will presumably still be there when you are extended confirmed when you can edit the article yourself and participate in the consensus forming process. For non-EC editors, the options are limited to straightforward edit requests. Anything that is fuzzy/debatable/controversial/gray rather than black and white is unlikely to succeed. Edit requests that follow the WP:EDITXY guidelines are much more likely to succeed. Sean.hoyland (talk) 08:11, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Sienna Spiro. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 15:27, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

I want to ask you sonething. If Spiro hersrelf refer to her as Jewish, what's more valid then this? Like in this short (1:30 minutes) youtube video:

https://y.ou.tu.be/_YTaBA_uVtE?si=G6mrUQjKBrKQ129b. לידך בלעדייך (talk) 17:30, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

The issue becomes, does the video prove that her family is Jewish? It is reasonable to assume they are, as she's young to have converted, but it's still original research to conclude that her family is Jewish because she is.

As for the admissibility of the source, I'm inclined to let it stand if there no secondary source for her being Jewish. It falls within the realm of self-published sources, even if it's the record company putting out a (yes, promotional) video where she speaks. —C.Fred (talk) 17:48, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Okay. Her parents were interviewed or mentioned in The Jewish Chronicle, but if it's not enough, we can just say "Spiro is Jewish" with the youtube video, is it Okay? However one editor is opposing that source. לידך בלעדייך (talk) 18:10, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Ouch. The SPS is probably a better source than the Jewish Chronicle, based on WP:RS/Perennial sources. —C.Fred (talk) 18:14, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

I have the links you asked before if it helps.

So, can i put the youtube video back? What do i do if my edit is reverted again? לידך בלעדייך (talk) 18:25, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

I think you need to discuss the matter on the article's talk page and work toward consensus. —C.Fred (talk) 18:52, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

My niece's mother is Jewish and her father is not; my niece considers herself Jewish but it would not be factually correct to state that her family is. I do not dispute that Spiro is Jewish, and yes, it's likely that her family is as well, but Wikipedia is about facts, not assumptions. I removed the assertion that her family is Jewish and restored the YouTube link per C.Fred's comment above. JSFarman (talk) 23:31, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Please not that as you are not extended confirmed, you are only permitted to make uncontroversial edit requests within the topic area. !Voting as you did here is not an edit request. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 21:13, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

It was on the talk page. I can say my opnion. לידך בלעדייך (talk) 21:14, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

The restriction applies to any page on Wikipedia, including the talk page. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 21:15, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Please also see the notice at the top of the page, which states that You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive). 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 21:19, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Okay. These restrictions are new to me. In hewiki we do have restrictions on articles sometimes, but not on the talk pages (unless there's severe vandlism, but it's rare). Anyone can express his/her opinion, including anonymous users. The approach here is fanatic, really. But i'll follow the rules. לידך בלעדייך (talk) 21:49, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

We have these restrictions in place due to immense past disruption in the topic area. We've had 5 arbitration cases related to this topic area, each one costing large amounts of time. Its unfortunately necessary to enforce these restrictions strictly; I wish we didn't have to have these restrictions in place, but since we have them, I figure I should do my best to universally apply them in order to prevent any of my personal biases or biases of others affect the project. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 21:55, 1 March 2026 (UTC)