Contents

User talk:Emolu

Hi Emolu! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Shrike (talk) 14:27, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Generations of Noah, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Magog and Amurru. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:02, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your behavior on the Safed article is beginning to look like a protracted edit war, therefore let me warn you with this template: You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. . Please understand that you are the one who changed the article and whose version is being disputed. The correct way of going forward would therefore be for you to establish a consensus on the talkpage before making further edits, which would be considered a continuation of this edit war, with the negative repercussions for you that entails. Debresser (talk) 23:34, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there I noticed you have been changing the translation / transliterations. Can you please cite the references you are using? And in the future, please discuss before modifying cited text. el.ziade (talkallam) 18:56, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All I'm doing is separating the transcriptions into individual lines. The content and sources of the translations have not changed. Emolu (talk) 19:00, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the RFC expired in 2016, however there is a page level sanction requiring a new RFC for changes now. But I'm fine with that tag removal, as that wasnt a part of it anyway, the later wording changes not as much. nableezy - 21:29, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All good. Either way, I feel it's pertinent that there be a method for a new RFC, because the old one cannot be modified in any way, and it's the only one the edit window links. I don't know the procedure for things like that so I have no idea if this is something that can be done without involvement from any higher-up users. Emolu (talk) 15:15, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ~ ToBeFree (talk) 06:47, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You undid a whole bunch of edits, but thanked me for one. Is it because in that one, the interlinear template wasn't messing with the Phoenician right-to-left text direction? Because otherwise I'm really baffled by this. Eievie (talk) 02:30, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I thanked you before realizing what it is you were actually doing. Emolu (talk) 04:48, 10 October 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

I was blocked alongside a batch of unrelated accounts which were related to a puppet master with a Hebrew account name. I have:

• no overlap with the puppetmaster, be it timezone, the browser used for editing, native language, not a thing.
• no overlap with the other accused socks, there is no behavioral match whatsoever, as I have been an editor on this wiki for months before any of these accounts were even created, and each and every blocked sockpuppet account edited on the day of their account creation, and never again; I have been editing continuously since February 2023. All sockpuppets per EIU have <100 edits. I have 1200. And Editor Interaction Utility shows we don't even really overlap in subject matters..
• I have never come up in an IP scan or CU for the sockmaster, even though there have been at least seven made for the puppetmaster since my account was created, where I would have showed up.

I was blocked solely on the basis that I edit pages with a similar theme to the sockmaster – that being anything related to Judaism. A (eighth!) CheckUser was performed that identified several of the implicated accounts as operated by the same person, I was not among them, and yet @HJ Mitchell: blocked me anyway. Emolu (talk) 17:56, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Indeed, you are more likely a sockpuppet of Tombah than of Yaniv Horon, although it's possible you're some joint effort between the two, or the latter working on behalf of the former. You're definitely not a new user, though, so, declined, and talkpage access revoked. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 06:15, 20 October 2023 (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.

HJ Mitchell Ill add that I had run in to this user before and did not strike me as particularly Yaniv-esque. Though Ive been wrong in the past. nableezy - 18:31, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Nableezy and Tamzin: Emolu is actually a sock of User:Zhomron/User:BedrockPerson. I've suspected this since March or April, but didn't report it as I don't really know how to create an SPI. Most of their edits were pretty constructive back then anyway. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 08:46, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They both have a similar interest in ancient and regional Hebrew, as well as in the ancient Near East generally, and Emolu started editing shortly after Zhomron was blocked. Also see User:Rebfeee, which was used in between the Zhomron and Emolu accounts. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 08:55, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]