User talk:Shandor Newman

January 2022

Hello, I'm Synoman Barris. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Yahweh—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Megan B.... ^{It’s all coming to me} till the end of time 13:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Yahweh, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. tgeorgescu (talk) 13:52, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Favonian (talk) 14:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Shandor Newman (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The page is redundant and highly offensive to Jews and after posting on the talk page no one replied

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. 331dot (talk) 16:07, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Someone did reply ( contested it). Please don't make any changes to the article until there is a consensus at the talk page. Cheers --Megan B.... ^{It’s all coming to me} till the end of time 14:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Jehovah, you may be blocked from editing. You changed a sentence to read "The consensus among scholars is that the historical vocalization of the Tetragrammaton at the time of the redaction of the Torah (6th century BCE) is unknown." That contradicts the sources and didn't have a source. Doug Weller talk 15:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC) @Doug Weller: The pronunciation of the tetragrammaton is a widely disputed issue in Hebrew scholarship, and they did not have a source, their reference was for Yeh-wah not Y-hweh. Y-hweh comes from Iabe, with the letter B, which is what Greek historians reported the Samaritans using. Many scholars think they were saying Yape which means beautiful in Hebrew the way Jews substitute the name for Hashem since the tetragrammaton does not contain the letter B.[reply]

Doesn’t matter here. We go by what the sources say. You changed sourced text so it no longer reflected the sources, and that is unacceptable. Doug Weller talk 19:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please be careful about what you say to people. Some remarks, such as your addition to Talk:Yahweh can easily be misinterpreted, or viewed as harassment. Wikipedia is a supportive environment, where contributors should feel comfortable and safe while editing. Telling someone that if they don’t reply to your satisfaction they are lying. Doug Weller talk 20:11, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:51, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]