Malik Shabazz (talk | contribs) →Palestinian people: new section |
Malik Shabazz (talk | contribs) →Notice: new section |
||
Line 121: | Line 121: | ||
You've violated 1RR on [[Palestinian people]]. Please self-revert your last edit or you may be [[WP:block|block]]ed. — [[User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] <sup>[[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|Stalk]]</sub> 01:21, 30 April 2013 (UTC) |
You've violated 1RR on [[Palestinian people]]. Please self-revert your last edit or you may be [[WP:block|block]]ed. — [[User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] <sup>[[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|Stalk]]</sub> 01:21, 30 April 2013 (UTC) |
||
== Notice == |
|||
{{Ivmbox |
|||
| The [[WP:Arbitration Committee|Arbitration Committee]] has permitted [[WP:Administrators|administrators]] to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions]]) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to the [[Arab-Israeli conflict]]. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|purpose of Wikipedia]], satisfy any [[Wikipedia:Etiquette|standard of behavior]], or follow any [[Wikipedia:List of policies|normal editorial process]]. If you continue to misconduct yourself on pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the "[[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles#Final decision|Final decision]]" section of the decision page. |
|||
Please familiarise yourself with the information page at [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions]], with the appropriate sections of [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures]], and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system.<!-- Template:uw-sanctions - {{{topic|{{{t}}}}}} --> |
|||
| Ambox warning pn.svg |
|||
| icon size = 40px |
|||
}} — [[User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] <sup>[[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|Stalk]]</sub> 01:24, 30 April 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 01:24, 30 April 2013
Welcome
|
IranitGreenberg, you are invited to the Teahouse
Hi IranitGreenberg! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
prior accounts
Have you ever used a prior account on Wikipedia? nableezy - 15:03, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
- No, actually I'm new. Perhaps you could help me to improve my editions. Thanks for asking.--IranitGreenberg (talk) 00:12, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
- Well, I could make a suggestion or two, to "help ... to improve [your] editions", IranitGreenberg. Go easy on calling other user's edits "redundant", go easy on reverting, and use the talk page. But in general, we welcome newbies, Ajnem (talk) 16:32, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
- Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! If you are still looking for suggestions on how to improve editing, there are lots of instruction manuals available on this website, such as Help:Editing and Wikipedia:Summary style. It's also a good idea to look at some of the featured articles, as they are considered to be good examples of the best editing on Wikipedia. --1ST7 (talk) 21:12, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll take a look.--IranitGreenberg (talk) 22:27, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! If you are still looking for suggestions on how to improve editing, there are lots of instruction manuals available on this website, such as Help:Editing and Wikipedia:Summary style. It's also a good idea to look at some of the featured articles, as they are considered to be good examples of the best editing on Wikipedia. --1ST7 (talk) 21:12, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- Well, I could make a suggestion or two, to "help ... to improve [your] editions", IranitGreenberg. Go easy on calling other user's edits "redundant", go easy on reverting, and use the talk page. But in general, we welcome newbies, Ajnem (talk) 16:32, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Please go to Jew and add a "see also" to Jewish political violence. That will make it easier to see that you are here for the right reasons. Zerotalk 17:49, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
1RR
You've violated the 1RR at Palestinian people. Please self-revert your latest revert and discuss your edit on the talk page. nableezy - 17:50, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
- That actually didn't fix the issue, but I won't report the violation. nableezy - 20:12, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
You've violated the 1RR rule that applies to Israel and the apartheid analogy. Under the rule, which is featured prominently in the edit notice on the page (as well as the article's Talk page), an editor may not make more than one reversion during any 24-hour period.
Please undo ("self-revert") your last edit or you may be blocked for your 1RR violation. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:16, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
1RR violation
You have violated the 1RR rule once more here. Pluto2012 (talk) 07:16, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- No, I didn't. I only reverted you once.--IranitGreenberg (talk) 21:03, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- And if you are so desperate to avoid 1RR rule violations, I recommend you to look at this. Come on! Send a warning message to .--IranitGreenberg (talk) 21:27, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Inappropriate canvassing
Concerning your message:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AGilabrand&diff=552587496&oldid=552477134
Please read: Wikipedia:Canvassing. Further more of this behavior will be reported. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 17:04, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry, I didn't know. Gilabrand was already editing there. It won't happen again though.--IranitGreenberg (talk) 17:09, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- Your section header: "Anti-Israel vandalism in the article" and your reversion of previously reverted material with a clear explanation on talk of the reasons also can be seen as edit warring. (And a continuation of edit warring behavior when 1rr already has been violated in relevant edits.) Given your aggressive editing, being allegedly new, a couple complaints about 1RR, one has to wonder what is going on. If you are new, you should take it slower and learn the ropes. And you should revert back to the version previous to your reverts and read WP:Edit warring about policy. CarolMooreDC🗽 17:20, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- Nop. I didn't violated 1RR rule this time.--IranitGreenberg (talk) 17:34, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle - something you should check out. No one turned me on to it for my first couple years and only my natural cautiousness kept me from being blocked from edit warring. Explains why even a first revert in some situations - like someone else reverted the material and started a whole talk page discussion - can be seen as start of edit warring, especially if it continues. CarolMooreDC🗽 18:58, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- Nop. I didn't violated 1RR rule this time.--IranitGreenberg (talk) 17:34, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- Your section header: "Anti-Israel vandalism in the article" and your reversion of previously reverted material with a clear explanation on talk of the reasons also can be seen as edit warring. (And a continuation of edit warring behavior when 1rr already has been violated in relevant edits.) Given your aggressive editing, being allegedly new, a couple complaints about 1RR, one has to wonder what is going on. If you are new, you should take it slower and learn the ropes. And you should revert back to the version previous to your reverts and read WP:Edit warring about policy. CarolMooreDC🗽 17:20, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
You've violated 1RR on Palestinian people. Please self-revert your last edit or you may be blocked. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 01:21, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Notice
The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, satisfy any standard of behavior, or follow any normal editorial process. If you continue to misconduct yourself on pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the "Final decision" section of the decision page.
Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system.
— Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 01:24, 30 April 2013 (UTC)