User talk:Asad112/Archives/2012/February

lowered protection on Golan Heights
Per your question on my talk page, I've dropped the protection on that article to semi. Please do not resume edit warring on that article as you may be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 16:29, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Edit-warring? I am not sure if you are familiar or not with WP:ARBPIA, but the 1RR that is in place does not count towards reverts of IPs. Also, the unique restriction (namely the requirement of explaining all reverts on the article's talkpage) has only been practiced by myself so far. Interesting accusation though. -asad (talk) 16:35, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't say you violated 1RR. I said you were edit warring. They're different. Toddst1 (talk) 17:02, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * So making one revert and opening a discussion on the talkpage is edit-warring? Interesting definition. -asad (talk) 17:08, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

AE
In the future, if you are going to make mention of any admin action I take in an AE report I would appreciate at least a notification of it. I know you didn't mention me by name, but you did everything but. I don't mind people mentioning my decisions but you could at least do me the courtesy of letting me know you are doing so. --WGFinley (talk) 17:56, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, will do. -asad (talk) 15:23, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --WGFinley (talk) 00:27, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions notification
As a result of an arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, broadly understood. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad editing restrictions, described here and below.


 * Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.
 * The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.
 * Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.
 * Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently WP:AE), or the Committee.

These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.

Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary.

This notice is only effective if given by an uninvolved administrator and logged here.—I'm sure you are aware of the sanctions, but this is formal notification, since your conduct in the area has been called into question. This is not an assumption of guilt, merely something you should be aware of. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  00:38, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Wow, I had no idea about WP:ARBPIA, thanks. /friendly sarcasm. I guess all the eggs have to be in one basket sooner or later. -asad (talk) 00:55, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Norman Finkelstein article
I think his Jewish ethnicity should be mentioned a little more in the article, especially given how his views might be perceived. We have numerous reliable sources identifying him as Jewish-American so it should be mentioned or strongly alluded to in some way in the lede. At this point his ethnicity is only mentioned in the infobox.--The Devil&#39;s Advocate (talk) 19:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The article it links describes two things: 1) people of Jewish ancestry (of which Finkelstein is) and 2) People of the Jewish faith (of which Finkelstein is not). But this discussion should really be held at the article's talk page. -asad (talk) 19:03, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

AE
I've added you to the AE. It should be a given that the editor opening an AE is put under scrutiny as well, but now I am explicitly requested this. --Shuki (talk) 05:16, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You can add whatever you want, but I am under no obligation to respond until (and if) you file a report against me in the proper way. -asad (talk) 06:01, 7 February 2012 (UTC)