User talk:94.226.229.82

Dear Diannaa,

Thank you for the long explanation (see Wikipedia and copyright) for a contribution you labelled first as "fringe and undue weight". The link between the two is of course absolutely clear, isn't it?

Reading the editing history of many wikipedia pages about the subject, it seems more likely the 'war', as you like to call it for reasons probably to become clear later on, was in the making the moment some critical information concerning the Zionists was added to the wikipedia page?

Again, it is highly interesting you label the position of the Zionist German Jews about this topic in the year 1935 as "undue weight".

The deletion before yours by Beyond My Ken was even shorter in its arguments, just one word: "fringe".

Isn't is hard to start a discussion based on one or four words?

So, if you don't give a better explanation what rule I maybe have broken, or why the position of the Zionist German Jews is not relevant in this part of the history, I will consider this deletions as censorship and will re-add this contribution that expresses the position of the victims and are thus in my view very relevant.

Kind regards.

Dear Diannaa,

One full day later but still no reaction or will to talk from your side, this in contrary the swift reaction to delete contributions within the hour without any talk on beforehand, especially tricky when no explanation was given for the deletions.

As stated above, giving no better explanation than four words ("fringe and undue weight" ) can only be seen as censorship or abuse of power?

The question is also how this 'war' as you like to call it, did start, by the re-contribution after the deletion without any explanation on the talk page, ar by my reissue because censorship should not be tolerated, does it?

Can you explain how I eventually can ask for a second opinion on this matter?

Waiting for any talk about the reason "fringe and undue weight" by you on this talk page, best regards.

--94.226.229.82 (talk) 20:33, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Dear judges,

For those who will have to judge about this so called 'war', the sequence of actions is important and presents revealing information. Below the sequence of actions constructed from the histories of the talk (TALK) page and the main (MAIN) wiki page.

I merged the two lists of which the origine is easy to check. The history entries of the main page are preceded by (MAIN), the history entries of the talk page are preceded by (TALK)

One can see that Diannaa is executer and judge at the same time: she deletes a contribution without explanation, and then deletes it again with the reason that it was challenged twice, once by herself. She also did not give any further explanation about her vague reason on the talk page. It is hard to start a serious discussion in that way so I tended to label these actions more as censorship, not reasonable monitoring trying to preserve the quality of the page.

For that reason, I thereafter (on 21:17) both re-added the content by the undo button, and explained in the label of the contribution (talked) why I believe her labeling was wrong (is the opinion of the Zionist German Jews at that time of 'undo weight', really?), contra to the four word reason given by Diannaa. I expected to get a good explanation the next time the contribution would be deleted again eventually. Contrary to that, on 21:35 she shifted the reason to unproven copyright issues instead of explaining why she said the contribution was "fringe and undue weight". Would one call that a serious way of talking or is it a recurring way of treating content critical to Zionism?

Here is the history, taken on --94.226.229.82 (talk) 20:33, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

(TALK) 22:29, 26 February 2018‎ 94.226.229.82 (talk)‎. . (7,250 bytes) (+1,149)‎. . (About a contribution you labelled first as "fringe and undue weight", nothing about copyright stuff, and then it is war, at least (only) in your mind.) (undo)

(TALK) 21:41, 26 February 2018‎ Diannaa (talk | contribs)‎. . (6,101 bytes) (+1,847)‎. . (Warning: Edit warring on Nuremberg laws. (TW)) (undo)

(TALK) 21:41, 26 February 2018‎ Diannaa (talk | contribs)‎. . (4,254 bytes) (-32)‎. . (fix copypaste error) (undo)

(MAIN) 21:39, 26 February 2018‎ Diannaa (talk | contribs)‎. . (48,738 bytes) (-2,871)‎. . (please participate in the talk page discussion rather than edit warring.)

(TALK) 21:35, 26 February 2018‎ Diannaa (talk | contribs)‎. . (4,286 bytes) (+4,286)‎. . (Notice: Avoiding copyright problems on http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v13/v13n4p29_Weber.html.

(MAIN) 21:20, 26 February 2018‎ 94.226.229.82 (talk)‎. . (51,609 bytes) (+11)‎. . (Better wording: replacing Zionists by Zionist German Jews as in the article about the Haavara agreement) (Tag: Visual edit)

(MAIN) 21:17, 26 February 2018‎ 94.226.229.82 (talk)‎. . (51,598 bytes) (+2,860)‎. . (With the signment of tha Haavara agrement with the Nazi regime, the position of the Zionists is a very important item) (Tag: Visual edit)

(MAIN) 21:08, 26 February 2018‎ Diannaa (talk | contribs)‎. . (48,738 bytes) (-2,724)‎. . (Your edit has twice been challenged and removed; per the WP:BRD process, your next stop is the talk page to discuss) (Tag: Undo)

(MAIN) 21:04, 26 February 2018‎ 94.226.229.82 (talk)‎. . (51,462 bytes) (+2,724)‎. . (Undid revision 827799655 by Diannaa (talk)) (Tag: Undo)

(MAIN) 20:20, 26 February 2018‎ Diannaa (talk | contribs)‎. . (48,738 bytes) (-2,724)‎. . (Undid revision 827793907 by 94.226.229.82 (talk); fringe and undue weight) (Tag: Undo)

(MAIN) 19:43, 26 February 2018‎ 94.226.229.82 (talk)‎. . (51,462 bytes) (+2,724)‎. . (The Zionists welcomed the Nuremberg Laws) (Tag: Visual edit)

(MAIN) 17:23, 25 February 2018‎ Beyond My Ken (talk | contribs)‎. . (48,738 bytes) (-2,523)‎. . (Undid revision 827574998 by 94.226.229.82 (talk) Fringe) (Tag: Undo)

(MAIN) 14:41, 25 February 2018‎ 94.226.229.82 (talk)‎. . (51,261 bytes) (+2,523)‎. . (Zionist position) (Tag: Visual edit)

--94.226.229.82 (talk) 20:33, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright
Hello 94.226.229.82, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Nuremberg laws have been removed, as they appear to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues here.


 * You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
 * Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
 * Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Copyrights. You may also want to review Copy-paste.
 * If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Donating copyrighted materials.
 * In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
 * Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Translation. See also Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:35, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

February 2018
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Nuremberg laws. 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. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:41, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.