MPants at work (talk | contribs) |
Ad Orientem (talk | contribs) Adding Discretionary Sanctions 1RR |
||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
}} |
}} |
||
{{American English}} |
{{American English}} |
||
{{Ds/editnotice|1=1RR|topic=ap}} |
|||
{{controversial}} |
|||
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|blp=yes|1= |
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|blp=yes|1= |
||
{{WikiProject Biography |living=yes |class=C |listas=Yiannopoulos, Milo |a&e-work-group=yes |a&e-priority=low }} |
{{WikiProject Biography |living=yes |class=C |listas=Yiannopoulos, Milo |a&e-work-group=yes |a&e-priority=low }} |
||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
{{WikiProject LGBT studies|class=C|importance=low}} |
{{WikiProject LGBT studies|class=C|importance=low}} |
||
}} |
}} |
||
{{discretionary sanctions|topic=blp|style=long}} |
|||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
||
|archiveheader = {{tan}} |
|archiveheader = {{tan}} |
||
Line 142: | Line 141: | ||
::Okay, you've been edit warring over this for hours. I've warned you in an edit summary and at your talk page, and I'm warning you here: Knock it off or you ''will'' be reported. Your edits are disruptive and completely unconstructive: the category you keep trying to add doesn't even exist. |
::Okay, you've been edit warring over this for hours. I've warned you in an edit summary and at your talk page, and I'm warning you here: Knock it off or you ''will'' be reported. Your edits are disruptive and completely unconstructive: the category you keep trying to add doesn't even exist. |
||
::Finally, we're done here. I've responded to your claims with policy-and-logic-based reasons why we will not be implementing your edit. Your response has consisted of repeating yourself and ignoring everything that I and Only in death have said. At this point, you are accomplishing nothing but disruption. [[WP:STICK|It's time to walk away and find something else to do.]] <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">[[User:MPants at work|<font color="green">'''MjolnirPants'''</font>]] [[User_talk:MPants at work|<small>Tell me all about it.</small>]]</span> 15:16, 23 January 2017 (UTC) |
::Finally, we're done here. I've responded to your claims with policy-and-logic-based reasons why we will not be implementing your edit. Your response has consisted of repeating yourself and ignoring everything that I and Only in death have said. At this point, you are accomplishing nothing but disruption. [[WP:STICK|It's time to walk away and find something else to do.]] <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">[[User:MPants at work|<font color="green">'''MjolnirPants'''</font>]] [[User_talk:MPants at work|<small>Tell me all about it.</small>]]</span> 15:16, 23 January 2017 (UTC) |
||
==Discretionary Sanctions== |
|||
Due to the highly controversial nature of the subject of this article and the multiple BLP issues which have arisen, coupled with sometimes heated content disputes, I am imposing Discretionary Sanctions on this article per [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2|this ARBCOM decision]]. Specifically [[WP:1RR]] is now in effect. Thank you for your cooperation in abiding by this editing restriction. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem|talk]]) 15:49, 23 January 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:51, 23 January 2017
| |||||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on July 24, 2012. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Milo Yiannopoulos arranged a moonwalking flash mob at Liverpool Street station as a tribute to Michael Jackson shortly after his death? |
Before you edit this page:
This page relates to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Your behavior on this page is subject to special rules. You must follow:
If you do not follow those rules then you may be banned from editing on the topic or blocked from editing entirely. This restriction is authorised by the Arbitration Committee. Before making edits in this topic area, please familiarise yourself with the contentious topics policy. |
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Semi-protected edit request on 8 January 2017
Addition of information that while Milo reports on the Alt-Right movement, he has specifically stated, in addition to many other prominent Alt-Right leaders, that "[he] is not part of the alt-right".[1] Cynicalhistorian (talk) 00:21, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the
{{edit semi-protected}}
template. The article already reflects his tepid repudiation of the label. also. Grayfell (talk) 01:20, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Confusing - bad edit?
This sentence appears to be a bad edit. It makes no sense in English.
- He wrote a long and colleague Allum Bokhari penned a 5,000 word article[87] for Breitbart championing the movement and its intellectual backers, which he called "dangerously bright".
173.20.35.53 (talk) 18:54, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Straw poll
This edit was revert-warred so instead of revert warring back, let's have a straw poll. Should mention be made that Yiannopoulos was named 2016 Person of the Year by LGBTQ Nation?
- Yes, mention in the article because that is a major gay publication and positive information should be included in biographies in Wikipedia, especially this one so that Wikipedia won't be accused of homophobic bias. (Note: I'm not accusing Volunteer Marek of acting out of homophobia by reverting my edit). TariqMatters (talk) 19:21, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- No - It's trivial and apparently he made "a concerted effort to drum up votes via social media", so it's also meaningless.- MrX 20:55, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- Meh MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 21:00, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- A straw poll doesn't seem like a great way to start this, per WP:PNSD. Is there a reliable, independent source mentioning this? What's LGBTQ Nation? Was this an online poll, or was it selected by a board of editors or similar? If we cannot clearly and concisely answer those questions (in the article, not just on the talk page), this absolutely doesn't belong, because it's not informative. Adding an (obscure?) award without any context is misleading. If it's "a major gay publication", there should be independent sources commenting on this recognition, no? We can use those sources to provide background. Cramming info into the article to avoid accusations of homophobic bias is false balance, and is ridiculously non-neutral. Grayfell (talk) 21:04, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- The source makes it very, very clear that this was brigaded by Yiannopoulos, Breitbart, and their followers.
After a concerted effort to drum up votes via social media...
,Yiannopoulos' fans didn’t just flock to the site from his Facebook page though...
andYiannopoulos made the news throughout 2016 and always for truly awful reasons
. This is not positive information, and should not be misrepresented as such. Grayfell (talk) 21:15, 10 January 2017 (UTC)- I saw where it had been added to the "awards" section, and I agree with not putting it there. But I just can't bring myself to say that it's UNDUE to include it at all. Maybe in the "Controversies" section? MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 21:25, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- I had placed it in the "media coverage" section because that's where I thought it was appropriate to go. Judging from the other comments here, we're all thinking the same thing. By the way, is it normal for established editors to do a drive-by revert without discussing first, and then decline to participate in the discussion when the reverted editor starts one? Someone told me that long-time editors in Wikipedia often act like that. TariqMatters (talk) 21:31, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- An edit was made which lauded a highly controversial figure, using a source which was highly critical of that figure's involvement in the process which produced the laurels, without ever mentioning said criticism (only the laurels). Yeah, that kind of edit is pretty much just begging for a quick revert. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 21:38, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- I had placed it in the "media coverage" section because that's where I thought it was appropriate to go. Judging from the other comments here, we're all thinking the same thing. By the way, is it normal for established editors to do a drive-by revert without discussing first, and then decline to participate in the discussion when the reverted editor starts one? Someone told me that long-time editors in Wikipedia often act like that. TariqMatters (talk) 21:31, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- I saw where it had been added to the "awards" section, and I agree with not putting it there. But I just can't bring myself to say that it's UNDUE to include it at all. Maybe in the "Controversies" section? MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 21:25, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- The source makes it very, very clear that this was brigaded by Yiannopoulos, Breitbart, and their followers.
I wouldn't object to it being somewhere more appropriate, I guess, but only with independent sources. Otherwise this was just a goofy PR game he played and won, and so what? The LGBTQ Nation article seems a little embarrassed they got played like that (the user-comment screenshot, for example), so its encyclopedic significance seems minimal, but outside sources would clear that up. Grayfell (talk) 21:53, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- One thing is sure: If it's going in, it's got to include info about him gaming the poll. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 22:08, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
UC Davis incident
As I have several friends as eyewitnesses who documented the UC Davis cancellation, the sentence supported by source 126 needs to be amended. This is lifted straight from a tweet made by Milo Yiannopoulos himself, and unsubstantiated by any other news source than Breitbart. This is shoddy content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.Davis (talk • contribs) 05:34, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
- Welcome to Wikipedia, M.Davis. Unfortunately, your own personal knowledge is not a reliable source for writing claims of fact in an article. You will need to provide a reliable source for any content you wish to add to the article. If you need help finding one, you can ask anyone you see participating here, and we'd be happy to help you get started. The first thing you should know is that you should always sign your comments on talk pages by typing four tildes at the end, like this (~~~~). MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 05:58, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
- The UC Davis Police have said that there were no broken windows or reports of hammers https://www.facebook.com/UCDavis/posts/10158116966805215 / http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2017/01/13/milo-yiannopoulos-martin-shkreli-set-to-speak-at-uc-davis/. It appears that this information was started by Milo's Twitter post. Crbarahona (talk) 06:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 14 January 2017
According to the Associated Press, there was no violence or property destruction at the UC-Davis protest: https://www.yahoo.com/news/protests-shutdown-far-speaker-uc-davis-053553008.html 104.162.225.58 (talk) 08:00, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
- Forgive me if this isn't the proper way to reopen this edit, but I've not been involved in protected pages before. Contrary to AP's reporting, UC Davis police reports a single arrest as explained in the UC Davis Media Relations press release: https://www.ucdavis.edu/news/message-interim-chancellor-ralph-j-hexter-event-cancellationCrbarahona (talk) 19:42, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Breitbart News "far right"?
The first sentence in the lede states "Milo Yiannopoulos is a British journalist, entrepreneur, public speaker, and technology editor for Breitbart News, a far-right news and opinion website based in the United States. Breitbart is not considered "far-right" but rather, "alt-right". According to the lede in the Wiki on the far-right: "Far-right politics often involve a focus on tradition, real or imagined, as opposed to policies and customs that are regarded as reflective of modernism. Many far-right ideologies have a disregard or a disdain for egalitarianism, even if they do not always express overt support for social hierarchy, elements of social conservatism and opposition to most forms of liberalism and socialism. The term is commonly used to describe right-wing populist ideologies which is known for its espousal of extreme nationalism and its opposition to immigration, as well as its advocacy of Nazism, neo-Nazism, fascism, neo-fascism and other ideologies or organizations that feature extreme nationalist, chauvinist, xenophobic, racist, or reactionary views, which can lead to oppression and violence against groups of people based on their supposed inferiority, or their perceived threat to the nation, state or ultraconservative traditional social institutions." This description does not apply to Breitbart, which, AFAIK has never expressed support for Nazism, neo-Nazism, fascism, neo-fascism, nor violence against groups. Indeed, Jewish groups have praised Breitbart for defending against anti-Semitism (which rather discredits the "Nazi" or "neo-Nazi" notions). There are plenty of legitimate criticisms to be made about Breitbart, but any article that calls them "far-right" undermines its own credibility, and leaves no room for describing the position of truly far-right media, such as Stormfront. Breitbart is "alt-right"; there's no reason to exaggerate their position on the spectrum. Bricology (talk) 06:04, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- Been over this. Read archives here and at the Breitbart article.Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:25, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- Misleading - there was no consensus reached. I've added the term "right wing" so it now reads "right wing to far right" - exactly as it does on the Breitbart News article. And there is every reason to exaggerate; this is Wikipedia, a majority left-wing cabal. Phatwa (talk) 13:10, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- And by your use of 'cabal' you instantly put yourself into the group 'people who are least likely to be objective'. Only in death does duty end (talk) 13:17, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- First edit picked at random from your contribs: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=760492077, pot-kettle etc. Phatwa (talk) 13:33, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry, describing a trash tabloid as trash that has been caught *blatantly making stuff up*, with a history of printing homophobia, racism, sexism, and supporting the Nazi's is somehow evidence of a left-wing cabal? Ahahahahahahahaaaaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaahahaha. Only in death does duty end (talk) 13:44, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Phatwa:, please focus on content, not contributors per WP:CIVIL. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 13:52, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- I've already reverted. The lack of consensus claimed doesn't exist anywhere in current talk space, and I suspect doesn't exist (except perhaps historically, in that it's no longer the case) in archives. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 13:22, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- It's from November 2016 in the Archive (page 3). Phatwa (talk) 13:30, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- The consensus in that discussion (there are three in that archive page, but all came to the same consensus) per WP:CON was to refer to Breitbart as "alt-right". Please read WP:CON and understand that consensus is not a vote. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 13:50, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- It's from November 2016 in the Archive (page 3). Phatwa (talk) 13:30, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- First edit picked at random from your contribs: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=760492077, pot-kettle etc. Phatwa (talk) 13:33, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- And by your use of 'cabal' you instantly put yourself into the group 'people who are least likely to be objective'. Only in death does duty end (talk) 13:17, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- Misleading - there was no consensus reached. I've added the term "right wing" so it now reads "right wing to far right" - exactly as it does on the Breitbart News article. And there is every reason to exaggerate; this is Wikipedia, a majority left-wing cabal. Phatwa (talk) 13:10, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- 'Alt-right' is a subset of 'far-right'. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 13:08, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Great post. My comment was about the reason for no editing on the Milo page is simply that the individual who does not know the difference between alt and far is more interested in preventing corrections or maybe he thinks that people who correct him are vandals. Tonertee (talk) 05:39, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
- What comment are you referring to? Also, as has been pointed out before: alt-right is a subset of far right according to every reliable source to have written about it. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 19:01, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Yiannopoulos is Jewish - and adequate sources verify this, until proven otherwise
One can of course go roundabout searching for disrupting and twisting excuses to sabotage proper Wikipedia editing (WP:NOTCENSORED, WP:CHERRYPICKING). The most valid and orthodox source for establishing who is Jewish is the Halacha ; and that's final. WringIng out any half baked obstreperous rationalisation is totally inexcusable and unwanted on Wikipedia. In any other Wikipedia article known/repeatable newspapers or magazines are used as valid sources and can be only countered by other sources claiming otherwise. The Forward Yiannopoulos’s maternal grandmother is Jewish, so according to Jewish law, he is, too, but he was raised Catholic.(January 3, 2017 By Daniel J. Solomon) http://forward.com/fast-forward/358909/milo-yiannopoulos-slams-thick-as-pig-st-media-jews/) RudiLefkowitz (talk) 13:10, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- I think you're failing to see the distinction between a person's ethnicity and their religion. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 13:14, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- See Matrilineality in Judaism and Halakha. 1.Not all Jews follow Matrilineality, 2.Halakha is not necessary a binding law to all contemporary Jews. 3. Ethnicity and Religion are not the same. Only in death does duty end (talk) 13:27, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- Will you desist with your Jew-tagging. The source says according to 'Jewish law' X is Jewish. That is not enough for us to say 'X is Jewish' especially since the subject (and who knows regarding his mother) have in no way indicated they adhere to Jewish religious law. Only in death does duty end (talk) 13:49, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- Halakha is the main and most important authoritative source for Jewish thinking and custom. Other more modern, liberal and heterodox interpretations exist nowadays, even in mainstream discussion, but that does not change the traditional view and Jewish theology that the Jews are a people defined by there common heritage defined by the Halacha. It is absolutely false try to inject minority viewpoints as conclusive or to compare Judaism using some form double-entry bookkeeping comparison. Christianity is very much about faith and Judaism concerns itself traditionally and authoritatively with descent that is connected withJewish law. Jews are a G-d's people, descending from Abraham with a shared destiny and that is the traditional Jewish belief. RudiLefkowitz (talk) 13:52, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- Ahem: I think you're failing to see the distinction between a person's ethnicity and their religion. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 13:58, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- Well firstly since Milo is a contemporary figure and neither a traditional nor historical one, historical or traditional views have no sway on if someone is a Jew now. Secondly Halakha is a religious doctrine and outside of religion has no bearing on ethnicity. Thirdly the source does not say he is Jewish, it says that according to Jewish law he is, confirming the religious aspect. Fourthly, there is a reason the article basically says 'Milo claims he has a Jewish grandmother' because there is substantial criticism of his views that can be labelled anti-semitic. Only in death does duty end (talk) 14:02, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- Halakha is the main and most important authoritative source for Jewish thinking and custom. Other more modern, liberal and heterodox interpretations exist nowadays, even in mainstream discussion, but that does not change the traditional view and Jewish theology that the Jews are a people defined by there common heritage defined by the Halacha. It is absolutely false try to inject minority viewpoints as conclusive or to compare Judaism using some form double-entry bookkeeping comparison. Christianity is very much about faith and Judaism concerns itself traditionally and authoritatively with descent that is connected withJewish law. Jews are a G-d's people, descending from Abraham with a shared destiny and that is the traditional Jewish belief. RudiLefkowitz (talk) 13:52, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- But it is the same thing in Judaism (ethnicity&religion)! You're looking at this thing from the perspective and knowledge of a Western Christian or someone connected to that line of thought i.e. secularised West. Warm regards, RudiLefkowitz (talk) 14:08, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- First, traditional Judaism maintains that a person is a Jew if his mother is a Jew, regardless of who his father is.http://www.jewfaq.org/whoisjew.htm#Who
- - - - -
- However, many people who call themselves Jews do not believe in that religion at all! More than half of all Jews in Israel today call themselves "secular," and don't believe in G-d or any of the religious beliefs of Judaism.
- The most traditional Jews and the most liberal Jews and everyone in between would agree that these secular people are still Jews, regardless of their disbelief. See Who is a Jew? Clearly, then, there is more to being Jewish than just a religion.(http://www.jewfaq.org/judaism.htm) RudiLefkowitz (talk) 14:18, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- An illustrative example about the above mentioned is the anarchist Emma Goldman was born to an Orthodox Jewish family and rejected belief in God, while the Israeli prime minister Golda Meir, when asked if she believed in God, answered "I believe in the Jewish people, and the Jewish people believe in God. More recently, the French Jewish philosopher Jacques Derrida stated somewhat cryptically, "I rightly pass for an atheist". - Jewish atheism (: RudiLefkowitz (talk) 14:26, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- I'm not a Christian and I would remind you that making assumptions (which are easily refuted) about other editors' POV is a poor tactic to take in any discussion. Furthermore, you're still not drawing the distinction: Your commentary here strongly implies (indeed, I don't see how you could insist you didn't mean to imply it) that we should excise "Catholic" and replace it with "Jewish" because Milo happens to come from the same ethnic group that produced a religion which has established complex-yet-unambiguous rules governing who they consider to be a member of their religion/ethnic group. It's akin to suggesting that I must be a Germanic Neopagan because I have Norwegian ancestry, which unquestionably makes me a Norseman. And if that's the case, I might simply remind you of my people's preferred method of conflict resolution. Unless you have three shields, a cloak and time for a swordfight next week, you may not want to continue this argument. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 14:25, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- I'm going to be a bit shorter than MP: If you cant tell the difference between Milo and a Russian Orthodox Jew named Goldman, an Israeli, and a Sephardic Jew, there is little to be done here. Only in death does duty end (talk) 14:32, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- I'm not a Christian and I would remind you that making assumptions (which are easily refuted) about other editors' POV is a poor tactic to take in any discussion. Furthermore, you're still not drawing the distinction: Your commentary here strongly implies (indeed, I don't see how you could insist you didn't mean to imply it) that we should excise "Catholic" and replace it with "Jewish" because Milo happens to come from the same ethnic group that produced a religion which has established complex-yet-unambiguous rules governing who they consider to be a member of their religion/ethnic group. It's akin to suggesting that I must be a Germanic Neopagan because I have Norwegian ancestry, which unquestionably makes me a Norseman. And if that's the case, I might simply remind you of my people's preferred method of conflict resolution. Unless you have three shields, a cloak and time for a swordfight next week, you may not want to continue this argument. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 14:25, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- In fact, there is no difference between Milo and a Russian Orthodox Jew named Goldman, if it adheres to authoritative Jewish sources and Jewish theology that define who is a Jew. So User:Only in death, you mean that Larry Ellison, Scarlett Johansson, Natalie Portman, Jake Gyllenhaal, Brian L. Roberts, Abe Fortas, Tony Curtis, Kirk Douglas, Daniel Radcliffe, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and even Samuel Montagu, 1st Baron Swaythling can't be Jewish or shouldn't be, because they are not a "Russian Orthodox Jew named Goldman"? Regards, RudiLefkowitz (talk) 14:57, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- How many of them identify as a practicing Catholic? MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 15:01, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- In fact, there is no difference between Milo and a Russian Orthodox Jew named Goldman, if it adheres to authoritative Jewish sources and Jewish theology that define who is a Jew. So User:Only in death, you mean that Larry Ellison, Scarlett Johansson, Natalie Portman, Jake Gyllenhaal, Brian L. Roberts, Abe Fortas, Tony Curtis, Kirk Douglas, Daniel Radcliffe, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and even Samuel Montagu, 1st Baron Swaythling can't be Jewish or shouldn't be, because they are not a "Russian Orthodox Jew named Goldman"? Regards, RudiLefkowitz (talk) 14:57, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- ....Judaism maintains that a person is a Jew if his mother is a Jew, regardless of who his father is. (http://www.jewfaq.org/whoisjew.htm#Who) Regards,RudiLefkowitz (talk) 15:05, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- However, many people who call themselves Jews do not believe in that religion at all (http://www.jewfaq.org/judaism.htm)! Regards,RudiLefkowitz (talk) 15:05, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Germanic Neopaganism maintains that the descendants of Odin are forever in his service. So once again, does that make me a Germanic Neopagan?
Also, again I want to remind you that there is a difference between ethnicity and religion. He is already identified as a (self-proclaimed, but still) person of Jewish heritage. He is (correctly) also identified as a practicing catholic. You are literally arguing that this article should lie because the truth offends your religious sensibilities. Fuck. That. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 15:07, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- Regardless of disbelief or losing the technical 'status' of being a Jew by adopting another faith, you are still a Jew. Jews believe that a Jew is someone who is the child of a Jewish mother (http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/judaism/beliefs/beliefs_1.shtml) Regards, RudiLefkowitz (talk) 15:10, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- Okay, you've been edit warring over this for hours. I've warned you in an edit summary and at your talk page, and I'm warning you here: Knock it off or you will be reported. Your edits are disruptive and completely unconstructive: the category you keep trying to add doesn't even exist.
- Finally, we're done here. I've responded to your claims with policy-and-logic-based reasons why we will not be implementing your edit. Your response has consisted of repeating yourself and ignoring everything that I and Only in death have said. At this point, you are accomplishing nothing but disruption. It's time to walk away and find something else to do. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 15:16, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Discretionary Sanctions
Due to the highly controversial nature of the subject of this article and the multiple BLP issues which have arisen, coupled with sometimes heated content disputes, I am imposing Discretionary Sanctions on this article per this ARBCOM decision. Specifically WP:1RR is now in effect. Thank you for your cooperation in abiding by this editing restriction. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:49, 23 January 2017 (UTC)