GreenC bot (talk | contribs) m 1 dispenser.homenet.org URL deleted due to domain hijacking by squatters (discussion) |
→WP:ARBPIA reminder: new section Tag: contentious topics alert |
||
Line 133: | Line 133: | ||
Have you used any other accounts on Wikipedia? <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User talk:Nableezy|<font color="#C11B17">nableezy</font>]]''' - 08:51, 18 July 2017 (UTC)</small> |
Have you used any other accounts on Wikipedia? <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User talk:Nableezy|<font color="#C11B17">nableezy</font>]]''' - 08:51, 18 July 2017 (UTC)</small> |
||
== [[WP:ARBPIA]] reminder == |
|||
{{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 [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee|Arbitration Committee]] has authorised [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions|discretionary sanctions]] to be used for pages regarding the [[Arab–Israeli conflict]], a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles|here]]. |
|||
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Involved admins|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 that 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:MShabazz|MShabazz]] <sup>[[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/MShabazz|Stalk]]</sub> 13:19, 30 October 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:19, 30 October 2017
Welcome!
Hello, Eym174, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
- Introduction to Wikipedia
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article
- Simplified Manual of Style
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}}
before the question. Again, welcome! —Ynhockey (Talk) 09:06, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
List of cities by time of continuous habitation
You are supposed to discuss your changes on the talk pages per WP:BRD, not to revert three times. In Palestine-Israel related matters, there is a limit of ONE (1) revert per day: Please see {{ARBPIA}}. Be aware of the following:
As a result of an arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, broadly understood. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad editing restrictions, described here and below.
- Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.
- The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.
- Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.
- Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently WP:AE), or the Committee.
These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.
Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary.
This notice is only effective if given by an uninvolved administrator and logged here. No such user (talk) 12:23, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
1RR
Please keep in mind that Yasser Arafat is under WP:ARBPIA sanctions. You have already broken it by reverting twice. Please self-revert and discuss on the talk page if you wish to make the change. Kingsindian ♝♚ 20:34, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, 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.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.Template:Z33 Kingsindian ♝♚ 20:35, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
January 2015
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on State of Palestine. 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.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount and can lead to a block, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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.
Please do not remove sources as you did with your edit at the State of Palestine. In addition you broke another source. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 07:03, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
WP:ARBPIA3
See WP:ARBPIA3#500/30 which applies to your account. There is also a notice at the top of the talk page of the Im Tirtzu article, a page you have edited. You need to self-revert your edit at Im Tirtzu. Also, you have violated the WP:1RR restriction which is also explained on the talk page notice. If you would like to continue editing Wikipedia you should make yourself aware of the constraints and comply with them. Sean.hoyland - talk 09:37, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you. I reviewed the constraints and will act accordingly. Appreciate the heads up. Eym174 (talk) 10:47, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Please note that your further edits on Im Tirtzu (on March 20th, 21st, and 26th) also violate this policy. --PPX (talk) 21:47, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
- I have less than 500 edits but have been editing for a few years now, therefore I believe that I do not violate this policy. Thanks for your concern. Eym174 (talk) 04:20, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
- Your belief is incorrect. Sean.hoyland - talk 05:33, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Please stop
You have been notified repeatedly that you are not allowed to edit articles related to the Arab-Israeli conflict because you have made fewer than 500 edits. If you don't stop voluntarily, you may be blocked from editing. — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 13:34, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
- When I was previously notified, my account did not violate the WP:ARBPIA3#500/30 guidelines. I see now that on March 19, 2016, the guidelines were updated and now accounts with fewer than 500 edits AND accounts with less than 30 days tenure can't edit. Previously the guidelines referred to accounts that both had fewer than 500 edits and less than 30 days tenure. Therefore this restriction only applies now. Eym174 (talk) 10:18, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- To clarify, the restriction has applied to your account since 22 November 2015. As I said on 9 March 2016 above, before the update, "See WP:ARBPIA3#500/30 which applies to your account." The scope of the restriction has not been changed. What has changed is the wording to clarify it because it became clear that it was susceptible to the misinterpretation you have made here. Sean.hoyland - talk 10:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
April 2016
Hello, I'm Contributor321. I noticed that you made a change to an article, University of Connecticut, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Contributor321 (talk) 16:41, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
- Nice catch! I guess it forgot to save. Readded with source (actually found a better one this time. Thanks! Eym174 (talk) 18:55, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
References
Remember that when adding content about health, please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations. WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a build in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:52, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Song lyrics
Song lyrics are copyright, and we can't include them here. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 03:39, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you
I wanted to take a moment to thank you for engaging in constructive discussions to build consensus on hot topics. Your maturity is appreciated. PPX (talk) 15:52, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for the kind words, the same goes for you as well. Eym174 (talk) 09:51, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Eym174. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Please read WP:NOYT more carefully. It says that Facebook pages may be used as sources if they are "official pages for notable subjects". Since the Israeli Christian Recruitment Forum is not a notable subject (it's a redirect to the biography of one of its founders, and its name doesn't appear in his article), the group's Facebook page is not the official page for a notable subject and, per WP:NOYT, Facebook is not considered a reliable source. — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 12:35, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- Can you please explain why the Israeli Christians Recruitment Forum is not a notable subject? True, it doesn't *yet* have a dedicated Wikipedia page, but by all means it fits the qualifications listed in WP:ORG. Correct me if I'm wrong, but an organization can still be notable without a Wiki page. Please review and get back to me. PasterofMuppets (talk) 13:18, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry, but the responsibility to demonstrate that the group is notable is yours. I didn't search in Hebrew, so I may be missing a lot of sources, but in English I couldn't find any evidence that it is "the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources" (WP:ORG). So what makes them notable? — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 12:56, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
- No problem, here are a small amount of results that a 30 second Google search yielded.[1][2][3][4][5][6] Please note that I didn't even include any sources in Hebrew, or English-language Israeli outlets. I could continue to cite sources but I think my point is clear and that coverage in outlets like Time, The Telegraph, Yahoo, Reuters, etc. demonstrate the notability of this group. PasterofMuppets (talk) 07:27, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
References
- ^ "Meet the Arab Christians who want to fight for Israel". The Telegraph.
- ^ "Israeli Army Sees Rise in Christian Arab Recruits". Time.
- ^ "Push to recruit Arab Christians into Israeli army". Yahoo News.
- ^ "Israel encouraging more Christians to join military service". Reuters.
- ^ "Christians Joining Israeli Defense Forces at Record Pace". Breitbart.
- ^ "The latest page in Israel's divide and conquer playbook: enlisting Palestinian Christians - See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/05/enlisting-palestinian-christians/#sthash.hraSNklO.dpuf". Mondowiess.
{{cite web}}
: External link in
(help)|title=
While those articles mention the organization in passing, not one of them is about the organization, which supports what I wrote: they have not been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources. Hence, not notable. — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 12:22, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
- I would urge you to review WP:ORG, as there is no evidence in this article to support your assertion that there needs to be an article solely about the organization. There mere fact that so many very credible sources discuss the organization surely attest to its unequivocal notability. PasterofMuppets (talk) 14:08, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
- Where are those reliable sources? The ones you cite above—some of which, like Breitbart and Mondoweiss, do not satisfy Wikipedia's standards for "reliability"—barely mention the organization. WP:ORG requires significant coverage of a group, not merely mentioning its name. Please provide reliable sources about the Israeli Christian Recruitment Forum because, as I wrote above last week, I'm not able to find any in English. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:29, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
- I believe that Reuters, the Telegraph, Yahoo, and Time are reliable sources. Please note the following line from WP:ORG: "If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability." PasterofMuppets (talk) 08:15, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
- Correct, a large number of very reliable sources that mention the group in the context of promoting the integration of Israeli minorities in the IDF, which is what the award was awarded for. On a side note, can you please explain to me how a recorded video of the Im Tirzu CEO receiving the award at the Israeli Chirstian Forum's conference would not be reliable. In what world is any other source more reliable than the actual video of it happening? I understand that you may take issue with Israeli minorities serving in the IDF, and that's your prerogative, but this is excessive. Awaiting your response. PasterofMuppets (talk) 13:54, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
First, the group isn't notable. Its award is probably equally unimportant. Please stop turning the article into a promotional puff piece. I understand that you may be enamored of fascist groups, and that's your prerogative, but this is an encyclopedia. — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 14:07, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
- Glossing over that inappropriate and unbecoming comment, receiving an award from the organization headed by Father Gabriel Naddaf, who is among the most recognizable (if not the most recognizable!) faces of Israeli Christians is certainly significant and not promotional in any way. I am afraid you are letting your personal opinion get in the way of objectivity. PasterofMuppets (talk) 14:26, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
- Well, like you said - speculation vs. assumption. We can agree to disagree which one is appropriate or not. And my only affection is for a balanced Wikipedia article, regardless if I like the subject or not. I would hope that is the same view of every Wiki editor. PasterofMuppets (talk) 17:30, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 31
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Im Tirtzu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Breaking the Silence. 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) 10:43, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
Prior accounts
Have you used any other accounts on Wikipedia? nableezy - 08:51, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
WP:ARBPIA reminder
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, 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 that 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 — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 13:19, 30 October 2017 (UTC)