Dominator1453 (talk | contribs) |
EtienneDolet (talk | contribs) →Regarding your edits at Turkey: new section Tag: contentious topics alert |
||
Line 117: | Line 117: | ||
In most cases, once your account is [[WIkipedia:Autoconfirmed|four days old and has ten edits]], you should be able to move an article yourself using the [[Help:Moving a page|"Move" tab]] at the top of the page (the tab may be [[:File:Vector hidden move button.jpg|hidden in a dropdown menu]] for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a [[Wikipedia:Redirect|redirect]] from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at [[Wikipedia:Requested moves|requested moves]] to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at [[Wikipedia:Requests for history merge]]. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-c&pmove--> '''''[[User:Hut 8.5|<span style="color:#FF0000;">Hut 8.5</span>]]''''' 21:49, 17 September 2015 (UTC) |
In most cases, once your account is [[WIkipedia:Autoconfirmed|four days old and has ten edits]], you should be able to move an article yourself using the [[Help:Moving a page|"Move" tab]] at the top of the page (the tab may be [[:File:Vector hidden move button.jpg|hidden in a dropdown menu]] for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a [[Wikipedia:Redirect|redirect]] from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at [[Wikipedia:Requested moves|requested moves]] to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at [[Wikipedia:Requests for history merge]]. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-c&pmove--> '''''[[User:Hut 8.5|<span style="color:#FF0000;">Hut 8.5</span>]]''''' 21:49, 17 September 2015 (UTC) |
||
:Hi [[User:Hut 8.5|<span style="color:#FF0000;">Hut 8.5</span>]], thank you for explaining a move in a clear manner. I will do as you suggest if there is a need next time. Stay smart, -[[User:Dominator1453|Dominator1453]] ([[User talk:Dominator1453#top|talk]]) 04:05, 18 September 2015 (UTC) |
:Hi [[User:Hut 8.5|<span style="color:#FF0000;">Hut 8.5</span>]], thank you for explaining a move in a clear manner. I will do as you suggest if there is a need next time. Stay smart, -[[User:Dominator1453|Dominator1453]] ([[User talk:Dominator1453#top|talk]]) 04:05, 18 September 2015 (UTC) |
||
== Regarding your edits at Turkey == |
|||
{{Ivm|2=''This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does '''not''' imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.'' |
|||
'''Please carefully read this information:''' |
|||
The Arbitration Committee has authorised [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions|discretionary sanctions]] to be used for pages regarding [[Armenia]], [[Azerbaijan]], or related conflicts, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2|here]]. |
|||
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means [[WP:INVOLVED|uninvolved]] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|purpose of Wikipedia]], our [[:Category:Wikipedia conduct policies|standards of behavior]], or relevant [[Wikipedia:List of policies|policies]]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as [[Wikipedia:Editing restrictions#Types of restrictions|editing restrictions]], [[Wikipedia:Banning policy#Types of bans|bans]], or [[WP:Blocking policy|blocks]]. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. |
|||
}}{{Z33}}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> [[User:EtienneDolet|Étienne Dolet]] ([[User talk:EtienneDolet|talk]]) 08:08, 13 November 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 08:08, 13 November 2015
Welcome
|
Your edits to Islamberg, New York have been reverted as blatant POV and OR. Please re-read the following before continuing to edit: CONTRIBUTING, FIVE PILLARS OF WIKIPEDIA and EDITING. Yours, Quis separabit? 11:35, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Ak Şemsettin
Hi, In WP most editors write proper names and the titles following the conventions of the language appropriate to the subject (See WP:Titles) . For example Hans Christian Ørsted is preferred instead of Orsted . Thus Ak Şemsettin can be a much better title than the awkward title Akshamsaddin. Thanks. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 13:43, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I thought about this and looked the name up in the internet. Akshamsaddin is a more established reference than Ak Şemsettin. In addition, he is referred to as tr:Akşemseddin in Turkish. -Dominator1453 (talk) 05:15, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
- Established usage is widespread usage like Napeleon, Churchilll or Renoir. But except for Ottoman history specialists almost no English speaker knows anything about Ak Şemsettin. I don't think Akshamsaddin is a good choice for a title. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 11:41, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Removing citation requests
Removing citation requests is usually a bad idea. In this case the main article for Bilal doesn't back the statement that he was from Abyssinia, so I've removed it entirely. Note that our policy states " The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material - the bold print is in the policy, not my addition .09:07, 4 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Weller (talk • contribs)
- You are absolutely right Doug Weller, but in this case it is a well-known fact, as stated in my comments, that Bilal is Abyssinian. If by "not being Abyssinian" you mean that he actually did not arrive from there, please note that he is of Abyssinian origin, as stated in the main article. I should not be explaining this to an experienced administrator. For all I care, you can remove the whole article. You have interpreted the rule according to how it fits your position at that moment. You are not serving Wikipedia this way though. If anything, Wikipedia is missing information readily available elsewhere on the internet or in documents. So instead of deleting info, you could try and support it by finding references. :) -Dominator1453 (talk) 10:59, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
The material I removed said that he "was from Abyssinia" which is not stated at Bilal Ibn Rabah's article. If it really was a well known fact I'd expect it to be there. You should have found a reference, not removed the citation request, if it's that easy. Of course, if he had an Abyssinian mother he was part Abyssinian as you say, but that doesn't make him "from Abyssinia". Of course as as he's half Abyssinian I can easily understand people calling him Abyssinian and then others, reading that, jumping to the assumption that he was actually from there. Are you disputing that he was born in Mecca? If you really want his half-Abyssinian origin mentioned, then the appropriate way would have been to mention his mother, not say he was of Abyssinian origin (and again, certainly not that he came from there). Doug Weller (talk) 11:30, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
- I do not recall writing the original sentence my friend. Anyway, thanks for taking the time to explain yourself. Take care. -Dominator1453 (talk) 11:34, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sünbül Efendi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tekke (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:27, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Hateful rhetoric of Jason Kenney
Hello, I'm Patar knight. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Jason Kenney seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 17:54, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hello Patar knight. What are we to do with people who do not have a neutral point of view in life then? If Hitler had a hateful rhetoric of non-Germans, should we not include that in Wikipedia and claim that we are neutral. Please reconsider your decision or edit it to make it sound more neutral. I only add information with references, as you will have noticed. Thank you for your kind attention. -Dominator1453 (talk) 03:58, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- It's easier for historical figures because there's a wealth of literature on them (e.g. Hitler and anti-semitism is well documented by reliable sources). It's harder for living people, because Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living people is quite strict about potential libel. Unless there are numerous, reputable organizations that are calling people such as Kenney an "Islamophobe", it's not okay to present Kenney being Islamophobic in the article as an outright fact. Even if it's just one person or group making the statement, adding that to the article probably gives that statement undue weight.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:26, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- I agree, yet that begs the question: how do you determine if an organization is reputable? Who determines it? Were the newspapers I listed unreliable? Even a wealth of literature is not necessarily a source of reliable information. Do you see where I am getting at? You have a tough job. Take care,-Dominator1453 (talk) 04:35, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- There's a general definition of what constitutes a reliable source in that page's overview section. The Ottawa Citizen is definitely a reliable source, but the Electronic Intifada, an unabashedly pro-Palestinian, anti-Israeli website, is not, especially since this is an article about Islam. However, even if both of them were reliable sources, they can't be used to source the claim you made in your edit, in which you claim "[Jason Kenney] is seen as a hate-mongering Islamophobe by many in Canada." If you look at the Ottawa Citizen, nowhere is such a claim stated. The entire article is spent debunking the specific pictures purporting to be of ISIS slaves. Even in the Electronic Intifada article, which is naturally biased against a cabinet minister in the unabashedly pro-Israel Harper government, says that "So far, there has been relatively little outcry in Canada." and says nothing about how Canadians perceive Kenney. So even if both sources say that Kenney is Islamophobic, which only the heavily biased Electronic Intifada says, neither would be a suitable reference for many Canadians seeing him in that light. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 05:06, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry, there was a misunderstanding as I was talking in general terms. One can always find a media outlet supporting a certain point of view. That would not be fair though. I simply searched for results in Google and added them. You can find anything if you search long enough. -Dominator1453 (talk) 05:50, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- There's a general definition of what constitutes a reliable source in that page's overview section. The Ottawa Citizen is definitely a reliable source, but the Electronic Intifada, an unabashedly pro-Palestinian, anti-Israeli website, is not, especially since this is an article about Islam. However, even if both of them were reliable sources, they can't be used to source the claim you made in your edit, in which you claim "[Jason Kenney] is seen as a hate-mongering Islamophobe by many in Canada." If you look at the Ottawa Citizen, nowhere is such a claim stated. The entire article is spent debunking the specific pictures purporting to be of ISIS slaves. Even in the Electronic Intifada article, which is naturally biased against a cabinet minister in the unabashedly pro-Israel Harper government, says that "So far, there has been relatively little outcry in Canada." and says nothing about how Canadians perceive Kenney. So even if both sources say that Kenney is Islamophobic, which only the heavily biased Electronic Intifada says, neither would be a suitable reference for many Canadians seeing him in that light. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 05:06, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- I agree, yet that begs the question: how do you determine if an organization is reputable? Who determines it? Were the newspapers I listed unreliable? Even a wealth of literature is not necessarily a source of reliable information. Do you see where I am getting at? You have a tough job. Take care,-Dominator1453 (talk) 04:35, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- It's easier for historical figures because there's a wealth of literature on them (e.g. Hitler and anti-semitism is well documented by reliable sources). It's harder for living people, because Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living people is quite strict about potential libel. Unless there are numerous, reputable organizations that are calling people such as Kenney an "Islamophobe", it's not okay to present Kenney being Islamophobic in the article as an outright fact. Even if it's just one person or group making the statement, adding that to the article probably gives that statement undue weight.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:26, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Moving pages
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Diyanet Center of America a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Hut 8.5 21:49, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Hut 8.5, thank you for explaining a move in a clear manner. I will do as you suggest if there is a need next time. Stay smart, -Dominator1453 (talk) 04:05, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Regarding your edits at Turkey
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.Template:Z33 Étienne Dolet (talk) 08:08, 13 November 2015 (UTC)