User talk:Tritomex

🇷🇸 Serbia🇺🇸 United States🇮🇱 Israel🇭🇺 Hungary

Demographic history of Jerusalem
Please explain your changes on Talk:Demographic history of Jerusalem - you have reverted reputable sources. If you explain clearly what you are trying to say on the talk page, we should be able to understand each other. Oncenawhile (talk) 16:57, 10 July 2011 (UTC) !

Hy Oncenawhile Yes I made two corrections.Fist I corrected the name of the chapter as all sources given indicate eighter relative or absolute Jewish majority.I don't see any conflicting results given.Second the reference Harrel and Stendel, 1974 was quoted twice,once correctly which I left and second time incorrectly,(showing two different results).I removed it. Third I didn't remove the only source indicating Muslim plurality in section 1830-69: Conflicting estimates regarding Muslim or Jewish plurality ref Yigal Shiloh, 1980 [11]although the page given is nonfunctional. There was one additional quote given which didn't match the source which was given.I would like to see that quote on the page,but given correctly without misleading interpretations


 * Hi there - let's continue this conversation here: Talk:Demographic history of Jerusalem <= click on the link as i have copied your response over. Oncenawhile (talk) 23:44, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * As an aside, please note that this page is subject to ARBPIA - please read this carefully as you have already violated it today. Oncenawhile (talk) 00:19, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

History of ancient Israel and Judah
Hi. Rather than edit-war, it would be better if you took you concerns to the Talk page. My problem, by the way, isn't the content of what you're trying to say, but a feeling that it's a level of detail we can't support in this article. PiCo (talk) 06:10, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Khirbet Qeiyafa
Perhaps you can explain where this page backs your claim of  "unequivocally stating that the written in Hebrew  alphabet (and Hebrew language" as I can't find the word alphabet, but on a related page on the same site  I find "the letters are very archaic in form, in the style known as Proto-Canaanite script." plus two more mentions that it is Proto-Canaanite on that page. There are other sources that say the same thing. Dougweller (talk) 21:47, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Khirbet Qeiyafa inscription
Hi Dougweller, The Khirbet Qeiyafa inscription was analyzed by Haifa university scientists(linguists and archeologists).Here is the link to their findings (press release). http://newmedia-eng.haifa.ac.il/?p=2043

University of Haifa has deciphered an inscription dating from the 10th century BCE (the period of King David’s reign), and has shown that this is a Hebrew inscription. The discovery makes this the earliest known Hebrew writing. The significance of this breakthrough relates to the fact that at least some of the biblical scriptures were composed hundreds of years before the dates presented today in research and that the Kingdom of Israel already existed at that time.

If you have nothing against, I will use this reference, as Haifa university is in the charge of examining this finding.

Considering the site "History_of_ancient_Israel_and_Judah Iron Age I" The Khirbet Qeiyafa inscription seems to be the most important archeological finding from Iron Age I, regarding the history(and historicity)  of ancient Israel and Judah. Therefore, I find important to mention it, in the section regarding that particular archeological period.

Our edits
We seem to be drifting into an edit war again, and I think we both want to avoid that.

Let me set out my basic points: PiCo (talk) 22:49, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The History of Ancient ISrael and Judah article has to make only broad general points, because it's got 2000 years of history to get through in about a thousand words. Individual archaeological finds can only be mentioned if they're extremely important - most of the time, we should put down what scholars are generally agree on as to the course of the history of these two states.
 * On the inscription the case is more complicated. Please be very careful in your use of sources - there are many in Israel and America who want to prove a case, either that David existed or that he did not. Many people, even scholars, are quite sincere in putting forward their views, but allow their commitment to their case to colour their views. We need to restrict ourselves to the agreed facts, and to present major viewpoints, but without entering into controversy or seeming to support one interpretation over another.

(A little later) This is an excellent example of what I mean: You have just made this edit to History of Ancient Israel/Judah:


 * During the reign of Hezekiah, between c. 715 and 686 BCE, a notable increase in the power of the Judean state can be observed. This is reflected by archaeological sites and findings such as the Broad Wall, defensive city wall in Jerusalem, Hezekiah's Tunnel, an aqueduct designed to provide Jerusalem with water during an impending siege by the Assyrians, led by Sennacherib. Siloam Inscription, lintel inscription, found over the doorway of a tomb, has been ascribed to his comptroller Shebna. LMLK seals on storage jar handles, excavated from strata formed by Sennacherib's destruction as well as immediately above that layer suggesting they were used throughout his 29-year reign, and Bullae from sealed documents, some that belonged to Hezekiah himself, while others name his servants. King Ahaz's Seal is a well-preserved piece of reddish-brown clay that belonged to King Ahaz of Judah, who ruled from 732 to 716 BCE. The seal contains not only the name of the king, but the name of his father, King Yehotam. In addition, Ahaz is specifically identified as "king of Judah." The Hebrew inscription, which is set on three lines, reads as follows: "l'hz*y/hwtm*mlk*/yhdh", which translates as "belonging to Ahaz (son of) Yehotam, King of Judah.

I have no objection to saying "During the reign of Hezekiah, between c. 715 and 686 BCE, a notable increase in the power of the Judean state can be observed", and your referenced source is a valid one. But I see no reason for all the supporting detail: if someone of Carr's stature says that we see a notable increase in the power of the Judean state in the reign of Hezekiah, I'll take his word for it. PiCo (talk) 22:53, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * This is the ONLY site on Wikipedia where we can show what has been archeologically verified from ancient Israel, and what is a myth. As you see below the sources of other sections are solely Biblical. This is something you may challenge. There are no places at Wiki (and shouldn't be other places) to give the summary of archeological facts, ESPECIALLY if we are speaking about strictly archeological sections like Iron Age sections.

We are speaking about the The History of Ancient Israel and Judah  and we are speaking about IRON AGE=ARCHEOLOGY


 * I have to confess that I simply do not understand what you're saying. Let me take your points one by one:
 * This is the ONLY site on Wikipedia where we can show what has been archeologically verified from ancient Israel, and what is a myth. First, the article on the history of ancient Israel and Judah is NOT the "only site" (I think you mean article) where we can show what has been archaeologically verified" from these two kingdoms. There are other articles which are specifically about the archaeology of the kingdoms. This one is about history.
 *  As you see below the sources of other sections are solely Biblical. This is one of the sentences that I simply do not understand. Are you saying that the section on the Iron Age uses archaeology and the others use the bible? This simply isn't so: the section on the Iron Age does make reference to the bible, and the other sections equally make reference to archaeology. What do you mean?
 * There are no places at Wiki (and shouldn't be other places) to give the summary of archeological facts, ESPECIALLY if we are speaking about strictly archeological sections like Iron Age sections. No places on Wiki to summarise the archaeology? There are many articles on the archaeology of the two kingdoms! There's one on Syro-Palestinian archaeology, and there's one on Biblical archaeology, and there are others also. Nor is the Iron Age "strictly archaeological" - the bible's Book of Joshua and Book of Judges are about the Iron Age I period, and the Books of Samuel and Kings are about Iron Age I and II respectively. Again I don't see what you mean.
 * As I've said before, and perhaps you missed it, my problem with your edits is to do with the way you approach writing - I actually agree with you about the historicity of the kingdoms, but we don't need all this detail. PiCo (talk) 07:06, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree with Pico's point about detail. As for the inscription, there are two aspects (besides its content and significance). One is the language it is written in, which may be Hebrew. The other is the script, which is so far as I can see not suggested to be Hebrew but Proto-Canaanite or perhaps Phoenician. It's 'Hebrew writing' just as this is 'English writing', but 'French writing' uses the same script as we are using right now. None of your sources have suggested a Hebrew script, and your latest edit will just confuse the reader. Dougweller (talk) 08:02, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Khirbet Qeiyafa
I will listen to your advice and I will not further edit that particular site, especially that I after my posts it was made much more objective. My further role in this issue is to watch for how long the current balanced presentation on that site will last. I have nothing against different opinion, that was the main reason why I was upset with the fact that Hebrew university/Haifa university opinion was totally erased from that site, replaced with non accessible sites and questionable quotes which likely do not represent the opinion of authors, they were credited with.

I am withdrawing from active edition of that particular subject. Thanks to everyone who gave me useful suggestion --Tritomex (talk) 20:02, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 23:32, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

ok

Sorry, but what does this refer to?
Tritomex, I'm sorry, but I'm finding it very hard to follow what you're saying. This is the message you elft me:

''We had this discussion regarding this subject and our edits were examined by administrator who removed my contribution regarding Elah fortress, while the section regarding Iron Age II was left. I consider that arbitration as fair and I adhered to this suggestion. However, you further removed some basic facts reflecting the history of ancient Judah and Israel from iron age II, which were left standing after the arbitration. Removing whole section is not the way, we can find compromise fairly on this issue. If you think that any posts are problematic, reflect on that particular detail and do not remove the whole sections.''

I agree that we should try to work together, and I believe we can - but I don't even know what article you're referring to. What whole section did I remove, and from what article? PiCo (talk) 21:59, 5 November 2011 (UTC)


 * 21:06, 5 November 2011 PiCo (talk | contribs) (60,122 bytes) (Undid revision 459109804 by Tritomex (talk)Noone doubts the accuracy of this, just the importance.) (undo)
 * I think that this revision is problematic, as the site "History of ancient Israel and Judah" was already examined by User:Dougweller, and my contribution regarding the Elah fortress was removed,maybe some sections written by you too.

Yet my edition in the section Iron age II was left to stand. I consider this arbitration a fair solution and a compromise. The archeological facts mentioned by me in this particular sections do not constitute involvement in too much details, as I mentioned only basic findings of fundamental importance.
 * If you have any suggestion about any particular archeological findings regarding this section, than write me, and do not remove them altogether --Tritomex (talk) 22:37, 5 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Ok, I understand now. I'm moving the posts you made on my personal page to the article Talk page, as this concerns the article and others should be given the chanec to comment. PiCo (talk) 00:09, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

July 2012
Your addition to Khirbet Qeiyafa has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Dougweller (talk) 06:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for reworking this. I've done some copy-editing. We use s lower-case 'b' for 'biblical' (except if quoted with an uppercase, part of a title or the first word of a sentence). See MOS:CAPS. We don't use 'Prof' ever, and even Professor shouldn't be used unless necessary to identify the person (so if there's a link to their article, no need) and then only once. I removed a number of commas also. Read what you write out loud, and if you don't pause, don't put a comma in. At least that's what I do. Thanks again. Dougweller (talk) 13:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Dispute at Jews
This is just a friendly reminder, which I'm sending to Historylover4 as well. Rather than reverting each other and discussing the disputed content via edit summaries, please discuss it on the article's talk page. Edit warring is always disruptive and contrary to policy, regardless of who is right, who is wrong, and who began the dispute. I have no opinion on the substance of the content at issue, but if the back-and-forth edits continue I'll see what I can do about protecting the article. Rivertorch (talk) 20:24, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion. I fully agree with you. My opinion is that Genetic studies and their results should be placed in right section. The article about the origin of Jews was written many years ago and remained unchanged until recently Historylover4 added some of genetic studies, with his conclusions. My latest edition is without any remarks objected by user Historylover4 Tritomex (talk) 21:22, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 23
Hi. When you recently edited Genetic studies on Jews, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Turkic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:12, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Three shekel ostracon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jehoash (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:34, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 13:46, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Dougweller (talk) 13:54, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Ahaz
Thanks. No idea how that got there. I noticed that the article said the trial was ongoing and it was clearly wrong to leave that there. Dougweller (talk) 05:22, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Citation styles
Please don't just provide links to Google books. We need book title, author, publisher, year, page number and ISBN. There is probably a citation template in the menus above the editing field which will help you (you have to click on not just cite book but 'show extra fields' so you can add the page number or numbers. See also WP:CITE as you have to use the style already used in an existing article. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 11:41, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * King Ahaz's Seal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bulla


 * Lachish relief (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Judah

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:32, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Talk page guidelines
Hi Tritomex. Regarding this edit to the Jerusalem Talk page, please review Talk page guidelines. You should not be editing other people's comments in a way that could be construed as altering its meaning. If you want to respond or add links then do so in your own comment not by editing mine. Regards Dlv999 (talk) 12:53, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Dlv999 I am familiar with Talk page guidelines and with all my wish to understand your concerns I do not understand what your objection is. Please clarify your problems with my comments.--Tritomex (talk) 13:06, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
 * You edited my comment in a way that seems to me to alter the meaning of my comment. I am asking you not to do it again. From Talk page guidelines: "Never edit or move someone's comment to change its meaning, even on your own talk page." Dlv999 (talk) 13:17, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Please notice that my comment is separated from yours by another comment. Certainly it was not my intention to edit your comment. I hope this explanation will satisfy your concern-

Best regards,--Tritomex (talk) 13:59, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Jerusalem
Hi, I would appreciate it if you'll add your opinion here: Talk:Jerusalem. --MeUser42 (talk) 20:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Vandals
I didn't know where else to put this. Sorry for the delay. I replied to your comment on my page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:PeterWaldo#Vandalization Regarding notifying Wikipedia, that Wikipedia is increasingly a propaganda tool of Islamists, to peddle Islamic so-called tradition as if it were historical, they simply don't seem to care about truth or they would have kicked those guys out long ago. The Islamists are fully aware that the nonsense they posted in the "Bakkah" page is specifically contradicted by scripture they cite as if to support it, but censor the only important part out of the very scripture they cite, to advance what they themselves recognize as a blatant lie! Over and over — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterWaldo (talk • contribs) 20:39, 28 October 2012 (UTC)  PeterWaldo (talk) 20:48, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

You can also report any violations of Wikipedia policy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requesting_dispute_resolution Do not forget to write everything down before on talk page. If there is possibility to resolve the dispute through talk page, this possibility should be used primarily. Best Regards--Tritomex (talk) 20:57, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I suggest you to write your problem as request for comment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/All
 * Wow quick reply! I simply don't have time (particularly after the untold hours I spent editing it on so many occasions only to come back months later to find it all erased). Since you have an interest in Jerusalem I would think it might be a topic that might interest you. Their claim is that Psalms 84 reference to Jews pilgrimage to the temple YHVH had them build on the temple mount IN ZION, is actually about God's people wandering across 1400 kilometers of unknown, untraveled, uncharted desert from Jerusalem to Mecca, to march around the Kaaba in Saudi Arabia 7 times, and then wander 1400 kilometers back to Jerusalem, most of 1,000 years before the first caravan was able to travel along the Red Sea in Arabia. I'm a bit too busy trying to help Jesus save Muhammad's followers, to spend my time trying to save Wikipedia.PeterWaldo (talk) 21:07, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Genetic data
Do you know of any genetic data regarding the theory of Kashmiri descent from lost tribes of Israel? -- Jethro  B  22:38, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I am certain that such genetic study was not made until now. Considering the haplogropups distribution in Kashmir the  pair-wise genetic distances between Kashmiri People and Jewish populations is likely huge, with little  possibility of common origin.--Tritomex (talk) 23:59, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Ashkenazi Jews
Personally, I'm about as comfortable with inserting "probably" and "likely" into that sentence as I would be with saying "the Holocaust probably happened" or "it is likely that the death toll is estimated to be 6 million Jews". As with many topics pertaining to Jews, the cultural and genetic origins of Ashkenazi Jews in particular are highly politicized and disputed by people who have an ulterior motive of some sort. So with that in mind, I'm reticent to leaving that topic open to debate, because their origins in the Middle East are known with about as much certainty as the Romani origins in the Indian subcontinent.69.248.98.23 (talk) 08:05, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok..I can agree with you-see talk page of the artickle for the continuation of our discussion.--Tritomex (talk) 18:48, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Proposal for change
How do you make a request for an article change? Who do I message?69.248.98.23 (talk) 16:06, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm also trying to get the List of indigenous peoples page on here to include Jews under South West Asia, rather than Old Yishuv, as it reeks of politics. Here's the change I've been trying to make.

Jews- an ethno-religious group who trace their origins to the Ancient Israelites and Hebrews of the Levant. Outside of the Jewish diaspora communities, Jews have maintained a presence in what is today Israel and Palestine throughout the Roman conquest and Muslim Arab rule.Evildoer187 (talk) 22:41, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


 * What exactly you mean under article change? Considering the specific issue you have raised I will take a look tomorrow.

Best regardsTritomex (talk) 22:16, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Re: Jasenovac-HRT
Please use Talk:Jasenovac concentration camp for these comments in the future. I'll have a look at that distinction in the source and adjust the phrasing accordingly. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 14:14, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Operation Pillar of Defense CNN/ORC Poll
Hey, I noticed that you restored the CNN/ORC poll to the article lead. There was a discussion about it on the talk page. Perhaps you can chime in because it will probably be deleted again without an explanation. Capscap (talk) 19:55, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you Capscap--Tritomex (talk) 00:27, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Update
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_indigenous_peoples

Evildoer187 (talk) 18:26, 8 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Perhaps you would care to make a concise statement defining your position regarding the relevance of genetics data to claiming the status of indigenous people for Jews in Palestine. I use the term Palestine in the sense of the following definition found on the corresponding Wikipedia page:

"Today, the region comprises the State of Israel and the Palestinian territories."
 * There has been some discussion with respect to the terms "Israelite" and "Israeli" on the Talk page, too, but it would seem that you haven't seen that. Please check it and add anything regarding the definition and usage of those terms that you may find relevant.--Ubikwit (talk) 14:56, 9 December 2012 (UTC)Ubikwit


 * I have explained myself in depth on the talk page there. I don't want to repeat myself here.Evildoer187 (talk) 22:23, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Request for comment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_indigenous_peoples#Include_Jews_as_Indigenous_to_Western_Asia

Evildoer187 (talk) 00:33, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Another request for comment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_indigenous_peoples#RfC:_Should_the_Palestinians_be_included_on_the_list_on_the_basis_of_tacit_UN_recognition_since_at_least_2009.3F

Evildoer187 (talk) 16:30, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Haplogroup G2b (Y-DNA), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lebanese (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:57, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Request for comment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_indigenous_peoples#RfC:_Should_the_Palestinians_be_included_on_the_list_on_the_basis_of_tacit_UN_recognition_since_at_least_2009.3F

Evildoer187 (talk) 18:30, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

RfArb: Jerusalem
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Arbitration/Requests and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
 * Arbitration/Requests;
 * Arbitration guide.

Thanks, --  tariq abjotu  20:19, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, as always I will again support mediation as the best way for solving complicated issues.--Tritomex (talk) 23:21, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

I have a concern
I don't know if you're a moderator, but...

It appears that the UNISPAL document relating to Palestinian indigeneity is an official UN document, whereas the other one clearly pertains to Bedouin Arabs. However, I am still wary of including them without also including Jews, as they too face very real threats regarding preservation of their culture, identity, and way of life in their historic homeland (which is Israel/Palestine, as consensus would have it), even if the UN doesn't currently recognize it officially for reasons we cannot ascertain for ourselves. The ramifications of implementing these edits runs the risk of implying that Jews are purely a foreign, colonial presence with no real roots in the region, which is demonstrably false and flies directly in the face of neutrality and facts, and is something that we on Wikipedia are compelled to avoid. This is especially relevant when one considers that there has been, and still is, a Jewish minority in what is now recognized as the Palestinian state before the initial wave of Jewish returnees to Palestine, as the UN document in question has recognized. Moreover, from what I can gather based on what is written at the top of the page, we are only using the definition of indigenous peoples posited by the UN as a blueprint for deciding for ourselves who to include. In that respect, the goalpost has clearly shifted from "meeting the international definition of indigenous" to "being officially recognized by the UN as indigenous", a definition that is problematic in its own right. While it is certainly true that the latter would imply the former, recognition as such is evidently not be a prerequisite for inclusion here. Furthermore, there is some criteria that they, along with Jews, do not meet (not being a national entity, for one).

I feel that if the sole determining factor for deciding who to include on this list is "recognition as such by an official UN body" (which is obviously not what it says at the top of the page, nor did we use it as a basis when including any other group), that we should make that clear in the intro paragraph to the article. At least this way, we can help to curtail further controversy and biased interpretations.Evildoer187 (talk) 23:31, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Response
As you can see, I am a little too focused at the moment on the dispute at List of indigenous peoples. I will turn my attention to the Genetic studies on Jews page once I am done with that.Evildoer187 (talk) 00:37, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Since this involves you....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Ubikwit

Evildoer187 (talk) 23:20, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

You might want to look at this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Settler_colonialism#Settler_colonialism_in_the_Middle_East

Since you are a geneticist, you might be able to argue this better than I can.

Evildoer187 (talk) 22:03, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Haplogroup G-M377 (Y-DNA), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lebanese (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

You might be interested in this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:American_Jews#Related_ethnic_groups

Evildoer187 (talk) 18:31, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Hey
Do you have any non-genetic sources I can use for the related ethnic groups section? I figured you might know of some.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_Jews

Evildoer187 (talk) 16:31, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Redirect blanking
Hi, if you have an issue with a redirect that doesn't qualify for speedy deletion, please take it to Redirects for discussion rather than blank the page as you did with Eleazar ben Ya'ir. Thanks! -- KTC (talk) 15:45, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "List of indigenous peoples Talk page".

If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form.

What this noticeboard is:


 * It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction.

What this noticeboard is not:


 * It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct.
 * It is not a place to discuss disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums.
 * It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN.
 * It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy.

Things to remember:


 * Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors.   Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion.
 * Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page.
 * Sign and date your posts with four tildes " ".
 * If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage.

Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! EarwigBot   operator  /  talk 20:47, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Fringe Theories Noticeboard discussion
Hello, Tritomex. This message is being sent to inform you that a discussion is taking place at Fringe theories/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Zerotalk 09:05, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Question
I thought I'd ask you, since you're a geneticist. Do you know where the Slavs originally came from, and how long they've been in Europe?

Thanks.

Evildoer187 (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Claims Jews are not an ethnic group
Hi! I went on the Germans page and saw that on the collage they put Einstein and Marx, who were obviously not German. I opened a discussion on the topic on the talk page, and I got a bunch of Germans saying Jews are not an ethnic group but a religion. Could you join the discussion and help explain them that Jews are an ethnic group and Einstein (who identified as a Jew) and Marx are Jewish.

I guess Germans have a thing for trying to make the Jewish ethnicity not exist. Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 20:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * There is a vote/discussion on the topic now. Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 18:38, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Moderation of Jerusalem RfC
Hello. You are receiving this message because you have recently participated at Talk:Jerusalem or because you were listed at one of the two recent requests for mediation of the Jerusalem article (1, 2). The Arbitration Committee recently mandated a binding request for comments about the wording of the lead of the Jerusalem article, and this message is to let you know that there is currently a moderated discussion underway to decide how that request for comments should be structured. If you are interested in participating in the discussion, you are invited to read the thread at Talk:Jerusalem, add yourself to the list of participants, and leave a statement. Please note that this discussion will not affect the contents of the article directly; the contents of the article will be decided in the request for comments itself, which will begin after we have finalised its structure. If you do not wish to participate in the present discussion, you may safely ignore this message; there is no need to respond. If you have any questions or comments about this, please leave them at my talk page. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 12:11, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Your post to me
sorry, forgot to respond. The only way to protect against sock puppets is to find them, we really can't lock it down at this moment. Sorry about that. Dougweller (talk) 09:24, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes of course, now it is really not the time... thank you for protecting our Wikipedia.--Tritomex (talk) 09:26, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Trying to (finally) close the discussion with a conclusion
Hi! Here’s what I wrote:.

Is there anything you would like to add? I tried to summarize it as much as possible, hope I didn’t skip anything worth mentioning! Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 10:11, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Genetics of Lebanon
New genetic studies have pointed to significant genetic differences between Middle Eastern Christian and Muslim Arab speaking population. As observed by Pierre A. Zalloua the main difference derive from elevated J1 haplogroup levels among the former.J-M267 originates from Arabian peninsula and low to moderate levels in Levant likely originated from neolithic time, yet the substantial differences on J-M267 level between Christians and Muslims as observed can not be explained through ancient migrations. Although autosomal DNA studies have not been carried out, this findings suggest substantial Arabian gen flow  following  Islamic conquest, into the contemporary Lebanese Muslim population and likely to other Leavntine Muslim Arab speaking population.

Y-Chromosomal Diversity in Lebanon Is Structured by Recent Historical Events

Table 6 Admixture Analyses "These observations, together with the historical information, led us to formulate three specific hypotheses: that many J[low asterisk](xJ2) chromosomes were introduced into Lebanese Muslims by the Muslim expansion from the Arabian Peninsula; that some I and R1b chromosomes were introduced into Lebanese Christians by immigrating European Christians, perhaps during the time of the Crusades; and that additional R1b chromosomes were introduced into Lebanese Muslims during the Ottoman expansion.The signal of migration, however, should be most readily detected in the highly differentiated haplogroups. J[low asterisk](xJ2) was found to be much more frequent in Lebanese Muslims than in Lebanese non-Muslims (25% vs. 15%, p < 0.0001)...Likewise, one can test the question of whether the difference in J[low asterisk](xJ2) frequencies between Muslims (25%) and non-Muslims (15%) would have emerged by drift without enhancement during the Islamic expansion from the Arabian Peninsula by considering the probability that the 15% frequency could have drifted up to 25% or more by chance in the ∼42 generations since the Islamic expansion. For an assumed effective population size of ∼5,000, this is 0.0023, and thus, again, admixture seems likely to have contributed "--Tritomex (talk) 11:59, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

ANI
As you continue to ignore WP:OWN, I've brought the matter to WP:ANI .Jeppiz (talk) 20:01, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Crimean Karaites‎
Please can you provide justification for this edit, at Talk:Crimean Karaites. I did look at the edits you made to the article on Khazars. Judging from one of your edits summaries, I expected there to be a discussion of Brook on the Talk:Khazars. There was something on Talk:Khazars/Archive 4, but did not help me understand your issues..--Toddy1 (talk) 19:17, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Khazars and Antisemites
You edited my deletion, but althought you gave me lots of rules, you didn't explained what you did. Is this an endurance war? It that how it's done? Please be rational and explain your actions - like I did.MVictorP (talk) 16:32, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I just proposed a new form for the section I deleted in the "Khazars" article, and I would like your input on it, given that you are one of the main editor of the article. Thanks in advance. MVictorP (talk) 12:03, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Khazar
This is your only warning. If you continue to edit war without discussing and gaining consensus on the talk page, you will be blocked. Thanks. &mdash;Dark 15:46, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Warning
Your recent edits on the "Khazars" article are un-acceptable, for what are obvious reason to everybody but you - namely, bias. Go back on its talk page - actions are about to be taken.

Thank you.MVictorP (talk) 13:01, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

As promised, and given that nothing has been done, I have now contacted administration. Good luck. MVictorP (talk) 11:47, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Again on edit warring on Khazars
Although the page has been full protected, please note that this is unacceptable behavior. I have told the parties repeatedly to establish consensus before reverting - you cannot simply just revert without discussing this issue and coming to an acceptable agreement. Please note that Wikipedia is a collaborative project; if you are unwilling to discuss this issue with other editors and respect consensus, I will pursue a topic ban or other such sanctions to prevent disruptive editing. &mdash;Dark 07:42, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for advises and I am really sorry that our dispute let to this reactions. I will respect your recommendations.--Tritomex (talk) 07:45, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

House of Yahweh ostracon
I recently created this page. However, I have material for dozens of other ancient artifacts from Israel/Palestine which are not mentioned in Wiki articles. Anyone interested in receiving this material and editing subsequent pages is welcome. Due to the lack of my time I will not be able to do this work.--Tritomex (talk) 11:24, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Sourcing problems again
I think you have been told that blogs can't be used as sources normally - WP:SPS - this article uses which is someone's personal blog. The material sourced to the blog is also copyvio from the blog, so I'm removing it all. Dougweller (talk) 11:45, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, yes I see amd I will revert it. Thank you. Please Look also Kinh Ahaz Seal artickle I think the blog is used also there.--Tritomex (talk) 11:48, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but that other source is no good, and Geisler etc aren't that good and are really unnecessary as it isn't challenged. I've found a much better source. Also, we can't call the Temple at Jerusalem Solomon's Temple as we simply don't know that for a fact. See what I've done at Solomon's Temple. Dougweller (talk) 12:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Can't see it, but I'm removing the self-published book from Xulon Press. Dougweller (talk) 12:11, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help. I will look to other sources also.--Tritomex (talk) 12:13, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Exuse me the blog is on the page Three shekel ostracon, although what it claims is likely correct. (I checked it on WP:RS)--Tritomex (talk) 12:39, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Islamization of Jerusalem, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Old City, Tiferet Yisrael and Jewish Quarter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:42, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ophel Treasure, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Menorah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:30, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Whom to address about fixing apparent gap in article?
Hello, Tritomex. Am ignorant about Wikipedia creation and maintance. I saw your name as most recent in contributors to this article. This is to ask that this please be directed to the appropriate person for fixing. Please see [***** note in paragraph 5 of article section below.

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_Jews

History[edit]

History of Jews in Europe before the Ashkenazim[edit]Historically, Ashkenazi Jews were thought to have originated from the Israelite tribes of the land of Israel, arrived in Europe in stages starting from ancient times (following the Greek and later Roman conquest of ancient Israel and Judea).[55]

In the following centuries such Jewish communities were joined by migration of Jews from Babylonia, Israel and other parts of the ancient world. First, Jews began settling in Germany, or "Ashkenaz", at least since the early 4th century.[56][57][58] Throughout Gaul and Germany for this period, with the possible exception of Trier, the archeological evidence suggests at most a fleeting presence of very few Jews, itinerant traders or artisans.[59] Yiddish emerged as a result of language contact with various High German vernaculars in the medieval period.[60] It was written with Hebrew characters, and heavily influenced by Hebrew and Aramaic. In the territory of what is now Austria, Jewish presence is documented since at least the 3rd century CE[61] In Hungary, minor Jewish presence was documented since the late Roman period.[62] In France, there was no substantial Jewish population in northern Gaul from late antiquity until the Middle Ages,[63] but Jewish communities existed in 465 CE in Brittany, in 524 CE in Valence, and in 533 CE in Orleans.[64] Jewish settlement in Romania dates back to 2nd century,[65] Jewish settlement in Italy dates back to the 1st century, when there was a large Jewish population in Rome.[66]

After the Roman empire had overpowered the Jewish resistance in the First Jewish–Roman War in Judea and destroyed the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem in 70 CE, the complete Roman takeover of Judea followed the Bar Kokhba rebellion of 132–135 CE. Though their numbers were greatly reduced, Jews continued to populate large parts of Judea province (renamed Palaestina), remaining a majority in Galilee for several hundred years. But, the Romans no longer recognized the authority of the Sanhedrin or any other Jewish body, and Jews were prohibited from living in Jerusalem. Outside the Roman Empire, a large Jewish community remained in Mesopotamia. Other Jewish populations could be found dispersed around the Mediterranean region, with the largest concentrations in the Levant, Egypt, Asia Minor, Greece, and Italy, including Rome. Smaller communities are recorded in southern Gaul (France), Spain, and North Africa.[67]

Many Jews were denied full Roman citizenship until 212 CE, when Emperor Caracalla granted all free peoples this privilege. Josephus ben Matthias, a direct-line descendant of the Hasmonaeans, became a Roman citizen and adopted the family name of the Roman Emperor Flavius, before 70 A.D. This was before he accompanied Vespasian's son Titus to Jerusalem and wrote The Antiquities of the Jews (The History of the Jews). As a penalty for the first Jewish Revolt, Jews were required to pay a poll tax until the reign of Emperor Julian in 363. In the late Roman Empire, Jews were free to form networks of cultural and religious ties and enter into various local occupations. But, after Christianity became the official religion of Rome and Constantinople in 380, Jews were increasingly marginalized.

In Syria-Palaestina and Mesopotamia, where Jewish religious scholarship was centered, the majority of Jews were still engaged in farming. Early Talmudic writings were concerned with agriculture. In diaspora communities, trade was a common occupation, facilitated by the easy mobility of traders through the dispersed Jewish communities.[68] wish Enlightenment, and the dev [***** appears to be an unintended omission here *****]

Throughout this period and into the early Middle Ages, some Jews assimilated into the dominant Greek and Latin cultures, mostly through conversion to Christianity.[69] A remnant of this Greek-speaking Jewish population (the Romaniotes) survives to this day. In the late Roman Empire, Jews are known to have lived in Cologne[58] and Trier, as well as in what is now France. King Dagobert I of the Franks expelled the Jews from his Merovingian kingdom in 629. Jews in former Roman territories faced new challenges as harsher anti-Jewish Church rulings were enforced. -

Sorry for my crude way of approaching this - thanks in advance for any assistance you can provide. 71.223.73.128 (talk) 22:13, 13 November 2013 (UTC) G Lykos, Arizona, USA


 * Hi dear friend, it looks like it was a writing error. Done--Tritomex (talk) 20:08, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Kindly read WP:NPA, then stop violating it.
Can I kindly recommend that you read WP:NPA and that you then start acting on it. Your constant insinuations about everybody not sharing your opinion are as impolite as they are out of place.Jeppiz (talk) 00:12, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I apologize if I insulted you which was not my intention. Although the revisionism remarks were not intended to you, I have to quote Wikipedia article regarding revisionism here "In historiography, historical revisionism is the reinterpretation of orthodox views on evidence, motivations, and decision-making processes surrounding a historical event. Though the word revisionism is sometimes used in a negative way, constant revision of history is part of the normal scholarly process of writing history" For example P. Wexler, many times mentioned on AJ talk page, proposed a theory that Yiddish was not a High Germanic language, something that is pretty much held as an "orthodox view" by broad academic society for centuries. --Tritomex (talk) 01:07, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries, we just misunderstood each other. Have a nice evening. Jeppiz (talk) 16:13, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

How to use talkpages
On a side-note. Please see TALK and Help:Using_talk_pages to learn how to use indentation when replying on talk pages. In short: take care that your posts should look like a continuation of a discussion and do not place all of them at the beginning of the margin. For those who are used to Wikipedia house-style, it is very irritating when you outdent all your posts, as though with every new reply you start something new which needs to receive major attention. Debresser (talk) 00:19, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Kurkh Monoliths (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Kingdom of Israel


 * List of artifacts in biblical archaeology (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Tyre

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

March 2014
To enforce an arbitration decision, and for an outrageous personal attack and casting aspersions against other editors, contrary to the warning to all participants in the result section and despite another editor having previously been blocked for the same misconduct. If you wish to file an AE request against a specific editor, please do so once your block has expired on the page WP:AE, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and then appeal your block using the instructions there. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  10:57, 9 March 2014 (UTC)  Reminder to administrators: In March 2010, ArbCom adopted a procedure prohibiting administrators "from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page." Administrators who reverse an arbitration enforcement block, such as this one, without clear authorisation will be summarily desysopped.

Nomination of List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel 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 Articles for deletion/List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. AlanS (talk) 14:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited William Schabas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Baird. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

I invite you to a discussion
Hi. A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gaza beach explosion (2006) should be moved to Israeli bombing of the Gaza beach (2006). I would like to know your opinion about this issue.--Mevarus (talk) 02:54, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Concerning your most recent edit on the article of Ashkenazi Jews autosomal DNA
I suppose your reason for that was (please correct me if I'm wrong) because said studies were already included in "Genetic studies on Jews"? As for Atzmon's quote, I added it a while back, by copying and pasting it from this source: "The authors of this study in Nature Communications, led by Gil Atzmon of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, noted that there had been mass conversions to Judaism in the early Roman empire, resulting in some 6 million citizens, or 10 percent of the population, practicing Judaism."

I assumed the New York Times was reliable per Wiki standards, please tell me if I was wrong on that. Guy355 (talk) 10:45, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your question. They are not just included in genetic studies on Jewish origin, they are already included in this article (AshkenazI jews) as Autosomal or transgenome (whole genome) genetic studies are the same thing as Association and linkage studies. No need to duplicate sections. Richards and all 2013, was not  even an autosomal or transgenome genetic study and it already took a prominent part of mtDNA section, where it belongs, There are many additional mt DNA genetic studies which are not mentioned. New York Times is off course a reliable source, however there are hundreds of articles from NYT, scientific journals and other reliable newspapers on this issue. Atzmon genetic study is available here  In the conclusion Atzmon states: "Here, genome-wide analysis of seven Jewish groups (Iranian, Iraqi, Syrian, Italian, Turkish, Greek, and Ashkenazi) and comparison with non-Jewish groups demonstrated distinctive Jewish population clusters, each with shared Middle Eastern ancestry, proximity to contemporary Middle Eastern populations, and variable degrees of European and North African admixture. Two major groups were identified by principal component, phylogenetic, and identity by descent (IBD) analysis: Middle Eastern Jews and European/Syrian Jews. The IBD segment sharing and the proximity of European Jews to each other and to southern European populations suggested similar origins for European Jewry and refuted large-scale genetic contributions of Central and Eastern European and Slavic populations to the formation of Ashkenazi Jewry."

Atzmon is already included in Association and linkage studies with large quotation, including the issue of conversions. I do not think that this article should be broaden further, with repetition of such details, I am also not sure, that this is the right place to cite each and every population geneticists opinion,  on this and others issues here, as i know for dozens of  such and this will turn this article on AJ to the article (or debate) regarding their genetic origin. Richards is also already included with huge quotation in mtDNA section.  However, the answer to your question is that the Ashkenazi jews article already has autosomal genetic studies section and Atzmon is already in. --Tritomex (talk) 11:12, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the very clear answer. As I suspected already, when the term "European" is mentioned with Ashkenazi Jews, it almost always means southern European, specifically Greek, rather than German or Polish. Guy355 (talk) 13:02, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

FYI
WP:ARBPIA3 is now open and evidence can be submitted until September 8. 62.90.5.221 (talk) 09:14, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

New Israel Fund
Every Attempt to add balance is rebuffed, despite well sourced contributions. Any assistance you'd care to offer is appreciated. 31.168.164.210 (talk) 15:17, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

=

November 2015
Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Jews. When you are directed to the talk page read it before reverting. You pretended not to know what was being objected to, but here is your own text You better read again if that's what you figured out. What you cited indicates only that the name was changed. We are talking about the same people with merely different names, as also stated here: "The Jewish people as a whole, initially called Hebrews (ʿIvrim), were known as Israelites (Yisreʾelim) from the time of their entrance into the Holy Land to the end of the Babylonian Exile (538 bc)." Got it? only semantics, different name for a different time and era, but the same people. Now, add this to the given previous source that clearly refers to Jews as Israelites i can't see how my argument was "blown". It is true that 'Israelite' is more used in a historical context, still, it doesn't contradict the current sentence in the article and doesn't require a change (which personally i don't necessarily object) especially when the article is about Jews. Infantom (talk) 21:58, 16 November 2015 (UTC) I have objected to the sources you have given, so you need to demonstrate concensus before you restore them. Johnmcintyre1959 (talk) 17:05, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

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) 16:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

I agree
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Palestinians&type=revision&diff=709678526&oldid=708968287 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omysfysfybmm (talk • contribs) 11:08, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

reporting
Are you actually going to report him? This has gone from a context dispute to outright obnoxiousness. He even reported me for "vandalism". And reverted an edit of mine for no reason except to spite me. I'm done reverting him because I don't want to break 3RR and I'd rather wait for a sanction than go back and forth.--Monochrome _ Monitor  00:09, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * User:Monochrome Monitor Avrahambeneliezer is a sockpuppet of Yogorundo2 and Historylover4. But I did not filled the report correctly. Please check this out.Tritomex (talk) 00:23, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Just curious, what's your mother tongue?--Monochrome _ Monitor  03:36, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Serbian and Hungarian.Tritomex (talk) 08:35, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, two tongues! Cool! Anyway....

--Monochrome _ Monitor  08:04, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Please fix the format in Amin al-Husseini
Thanks for your last contributions. But for some reason, from the words "According to Prof. Dina Porat..." to the rest of the article, the paragraphs were moved to the center. Please put them back in place. Thanks.--186.137.184.175 (talk) 00:57, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comment. I do not understand how and why it happened and I will try to find a solution for formatting.Tritomex (talk) 06:06, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Edit war warning
Your recent editing history at Archaeogenetics of the Near East shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jytdog (talk) 22:51, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note you left on my talk page. (diff) Three things:
 * If I place a template on your talk page as I did above, it means I am aware of the policy, so your providing the template notice to me has no point. It is obvious retaliation and this will look quite bad for you, if this escalates. Please avoid doing that in the future.  The dif of my giving you the notice is all you need, to show I am aware of the policy.
 * When you pasted the content onto my talk page, in your haste you inserted it in the midst of an existing comment, removing part of it. Please do not interfere with other people's comments on Talk pages.
 * In doing that, you broke the markup (removing the closing markup for an editing comment), which meant that everything afterwards became invisible.
 * There is no need to be hasty, not in templating nor in working toward consenus.
 * Please work toward consensus on the article Talk page. There is no fire to put out here. Jytdog (talk) 23:12, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It was not retaliation. You reverted fully my text, three times without proper explanation or policy based arguments. I am sorry if I broke the markup fro another comment, it was not my intention and I dint notice it. I try my best for the consensus, as you can see on talk pageTritomex (talk) 02:36, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Re new Elhaik addition on the Genetic studies on Jews page
Hello. An editor has recently added a somewhat substantial addition to the "Recent studies" section of the Genetic studies of Jews page describing the 2017 findings of Elkaik (and citing journalistic sources discussing that study). The addition seemed to me WP:UNDUE (and to give undue and misleading weight to a minority view, with elements of WP:REDFLAG also applying) and I explained my reasoning in the edit notes (See here: []. I removed the addition, but the editor reinstated it. i then reverted (with further explanations) and I have begun a discussion on the Talk page (Here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Genetic_studies_on_Jews#Elhaik_Addition]]. I am messaging you because you seem to have experience with and to have engaged with this topic before. Thank you. Skllagyook (talk) 13:19, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict...please fill out my survey?
Hello :) I am writing my MA dissertation on Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and I noticed that you have contributed to those pages. My dissertation will look at the process of collaborative knowledge production on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the effect it has on bias in the articles. This will involve understanding the profiles and motivations of editors, contention/controversy and dispute resolution in the talk pages, and bias in the final article. For more information, you can check out my meta-wiki research page or my user page, where I will be posting my findings when I am done. I would greatly appreciate if you could take 5 minutes to fill out this quick survey before 8 August 2021.

Participation in this survey is entirely voluntary and anonymous. There are no foreseeable risks nor benefits to you associated with this project. Thanks so much,

Sarah Sanbar

Sarabnas I'm researching Wikipedia Questions? 10:54, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

awareness template
That isnt how the template works, you need to specify the topics you are saying you are aware of.  nableezy  - 02:07, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, has anybody contacted you off-wiki to ask you to participate in RFCs or other discussions or to make edits on pages such as Talk:Zionism as settler colonialism, Antisemitism and at RS/N?  nableezy  - 02:11, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * After so many years on Wikipedia, I am fully aware of rules regarding Arab-Israeli conflict. All my edits and participations in discussions are my own contribution and no one else ever sucesfully influenced me, accept by making direct or indirect intimidations for which I do take nots. I do follow those pages. I have also question for you, you, do you have any contacts with some other editors regarding talk pages and edits or is it just coincidence, that you participate in so many of same edits on same articles?
 * No, I do not, and it isnt a coincidence, Im sure a bunch of us, on both sides, have a huge overlap in watchlists. But you didnt actually answer my question. Has anybody, specifically Yaniv Horon and his many sockpuppets, contacted you about any of those articles? I dont think youre doing anything wrong if somebody is contacting you for the record, Im just curious as to how widespread his efforts are.  nableezy  - 21:03, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I really cant recall having anything with that name and I am not aware of that particular sockpuppet case. As I opened now the mail I left here,  I found a lot of unread mails, including one that I am "eligible voter in the 2022 elections for the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation" So one positive thing came out from this conversation. If the question was if I do WP:CANVASS, the answer is no. Tritomex (talk) 23:54, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)