"{{unblock | I am appealing a 48-hour block that was placed on me before I could post my response via the administrator's message board. I apologize in advance for the length of this but I believe that it's necessary to include all of these details. I wrote a summary at the end so that administrator's could get an overview if they don't have time to read the whole statement.

I will be addressing the claim that I violated the 1RR rule in the second paragraph of this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitzhak_Shapira

According to WP:BLP, ""Biographies of living persons  must be written conservatively and with regard to a subject's privacy..."" 
In a book written in a foreign language, with a lot of jargon, there are often competing translations/interpretations. And a book written in such a hotspot is sure to generate numerous quotes, misquotes, dubious translation and out-of-context statements. As per WP:BLP I think it stands to reason that a more conservative and less sensationalist translation be used, and for the same reason, the quotes should not be taken out of the context that the book uses them in.

With than in mind on the 18th of February, I improved certain parts of the paragraph in question in order to make to make it more compatible with WP:BLP based on this source.

user:Zero0000 -  responded to one of my edits by stating that [en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yitzchak_Ginsburgh&diff;=538816167&oldid;=538810305 I ""can't read.""] And in what seemed to be extremely inappropriate comment for a Wikipedia administrator, told me in as many words to get off Wikipedia.""Take a break"" I didn't take nicely to being told that by an administrator and thus began a heated series of exchanges during which I was told by said individual that I had ""behavioral problems.""
Said individual also decided to respond to my comments by invoking what seemed to me to intimidation tactics ""I started to write a complaint against you"" (why do I need to know that? He can let me know when he posts it) and then later responding to another edit he didn't like by saying that ""it was on my charge sheet.""

Now the reason I am writing about the behavior of said individual is to give some context or the 1RR issue:
After posting my version of the paragraph, user:Zero0000 subsequently changed it to this.

I will post only the first few words of his statement and the source:

Source: ""There is a reason to kill babies [on the enemy side""]

user:Zero0000: [""Babies [on the enemy side may be killed .""]

After those first few words, user:Zero0000 continues quoting the rest of the paragraph. Now at best this is a serious distortion. 

And when you consider that article is dealing with a scholarly work which contains hundreds of sometimes competing, sometimes contradictory sources, rationales, theories, proposals, and ideas; many of which are subsequently discounted, limited in scope, or just tossed by the wayside, the disparity the statement ""may be done"" and ""there is a reason"" is even greater.

Aside from the distortion mentioned above, in contradiction to WP:BLP user:Zero0000 also opted for a particularly liberal out-of-context translation.

Why did user:Zero0000 replace my edit with his own. His statement:
(prefer source with an actual quotation)

As I showed above, he didn't use an actual quotation.

Furthermore, after seeing his comment, I searched but wasn't able to find any Wikipedia reference to a such a preference, leading me to believe that he was intent on just superimposing his own WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT on me without explanation. 

His actions above combined with the general hostility cited above led me to be believe that this was another front in the multi-pronged campaign of intimidation that he was engaging in (i.e. encouraging me ""take a break"").NEWLIN