User talk:71.245.245.202

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Beit Shemesh

With family and friends living in Beit Shemesh, I am more than familiar with the conflicts being raised. However, the edits that have been added to the article to describe the issue are in clear violation of Wikipedia policy requiring a neutral point of view. These edits need to be drastically reworded and properly sourced before they can be reinserted. Even ignoring the typo, describing someone as being "attacked by a group of hooligan Chardim" is blatant POV and is unacceptable in any Wikipedia article. Alansohn (talk) 13:18, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

  • The attackers were clearly 'labeled' by their own dress as Charedim. That was a self identification and not a POV. If you don't like the word hooligan, I will remove it. The rest is not POV but totally clearly 100% factual and not contested. If you want to censor facts that is totally against Wikipedia's policy.
    • I strongly suggest that you read Wikipedia policy on reliable and verifiable sourcing requirements, but most importantly, to read the policy on neutral point of view, which states that "All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), representing fairly and, as much as possible, without bias all significant views (that have been published by reliable sources). This is non-negotiable and expected on all articles, and of all article editors." The edits made to the Beit Shemesh article, even with the word "hooligan" removed are in clear violation of Wikipedia's NPOV policy. I do not contest that the incidents described have occurred. I am not aiming to "censor facts". But the text that you have repeatedly reinserted into this article is inappropriate for any encyclopedia and must be reworded with appropriate independent reliable and verifiable sources added before it can be reinserted. If the material is readded without substantial changes in tone and content, and without appropriate sources it will be removed and may be treated as vandalism. Alansohn (talk) 14:21, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC)