![]() |
Hi The kyle 3! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join experienced editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from experienced editors. These editors have been around for a long time and have extensive knowledge about how Wikipedia works. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from experts. I hope to see you there! TheOriginalSoni ( I'm a Teahouse host) This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot ( talk) 16:21, 8 November 2014 (UTC) |
Your comments and editing are aggressive and uncivil. ShulMaven ( talk) 17:40, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at 2014 Jerusalem synagogue massacre shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being
blocked from editing—especially if you violate the
three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three
reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
The article is part of
WP:ARBPIA and is under
WP:1RR.Please revert yourself.
Shrike (
talk) 04:35, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on
edit warring. The thread is
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:The_kyle_3 reported by User:Shrike (Result: ). Thank you.
Shrike (
talk) 04:37, 19 November 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. If you have questions, please contact me.Bbb23 ( talk) 06:19, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Greetings. I'm a host in the teahouse. FYI, you were mentioned in this question: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#Someone.27s_really_uncivil_to_me My first reaction to this question was that I didn't see anything uncivil in your (first few) comments on the talk page. Actually, I think you made some excellent points. One thing in particular another editor held up CNN as the most unbiased source. I think that is highly debatable and that in fact as Noam Chomsky and others have often said the Israeli press is often more honest about reporting violence in the region than the US and certainly than CNN which IMO has a clear right wing bias. It's just a bias that most Americans take for granted. Sorry... going of on a tangent; this is why I never edit political articles myself; my opinions are so strong it would be impossible for me to be objective. Anyway, the real point I wanted to make; and I hope you don't mind my sticking my nose in and giving you some completely unsolicited advise; is when you start calling people "likudniks" here you have already lost the argument. The kind of sarcasm and name calling that we take for granted on most other sites is just not acceptable here and once you do it anything else you say won't have nearly the influence with other editors as if you just stick to the facts and are always polite. I admire you for trying to edit these articles; I couldn't keep my emotions in check long enough to do it and I just wanted to suggest how you might be more effective in the future. -- MadScientistX11 ( talk) 16:32, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
118.201.50.156 (
talk) 05:08, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
I agree that this article is pretty dismal as it is now. However, you can't just blank it. You could WP:PROD it or take it to WP:AFD, but it looks like their are plenty of potential sources, so perhaps you should try to improve it instead. G S Palmer ( talk • contribs) 14:32, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Please
stop attacking other editors, as you did on
User talk:E.M.Gregory. If you continue, you may be
blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. —
Malik Shabazz
Talk/
Stalk 23:55, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:25, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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) 08:58, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Kindly refrain from removing appropriate categories and inserting inappropriate ones as you did just now at 2015 Shuvat Rachel shooting. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 17:08, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
You have just violated the 1RR at 2015 Shuvat Rachel shooting. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 19:34, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
You have such an interesting edit history. You wade into debates with a ferocious intensity, then disappear. But always on Israel/Palestine. I do wonder, do you also edit under other names? E.M.Gregory ( talk) 21:12, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on
edit warring. Thank you.
This is your only warning; if you make
personal attacks on other people again, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. —
Malik Shabazz
Talk/
Stalk 18:53, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Please note that the WP:BLP -policies also applies to all talk-pages. And BLP-issues are take *very* seriously here. Your edit here violates those policies, and you are very, very lucky if you are not blocked for it. Please revert it. Whatever your personal feelings about the man in question: please don't ever mention any characteristics about anybody without having a WP:RS backing you up. Huldra ( talk) 22:28, 9 August 2015
Your edit today at Duma arson attack, in which you added a faux quotation "lying Arabs", cited to an article in which those words did not appear, was reverted as a violation of Wikipedia policy. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 23:57, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
— Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 23:00, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
You have been warned many times about not engaging in personal attacks here. Comment on content, not the person, as you did at Talk:Israeli–Palestinian_conflict_(2015)#B._Late_2015_Israeli.E2.80.93Palestinian_unrest. You are really pushing your luck here. Kingsindian ♝ ♚ 21:07, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --
Bolter21 23:11, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for
your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with
Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the
reversion of clear-cut
vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you.
I am referring to edits such as [1], [2] and [3].
LjL ( talk) 23:48, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
As has already been explained, the Arbitration Committeee has approved discretionary sanctions on articles relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Under these discretionary sanctions, an uninvolved administrator can place blocks or bans as needed.
Because of your continual disruptive behavior, personal attacks, and edit warring in articles relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict, you are now topic banned from all pages relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict (broadly construed) until 00:00 UTC, 1 November 2016. That means no edits to articles, talk pages, or parts of other pages that have anything to do with the Arab-Israeli conflict. You may find more information at Wikipedia:Banning_policy#Topic_ban.
Obviously, you are welcome to edit elsewhere on the site, but any edits to topics broadly connected to the Arab-Israeli conflict will result in blocks of increasing length. If an edit violates this topic-ban and continues the pattern of disruptive or offensive behavior, the block could be indefinite. Ian.thomson ( talk) 09:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 17:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Vanjagenije
(talk) 17:02, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
Hi The kyle 3! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join experienced editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from experienced editors. These editors have been around for a long time and have extensive knowledge about how Wikipedia works. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from experts. I hope to see you there! TheOriginalSoni ( I'm a Teahouse host) This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot ( talk) 16:21, 8 November 2014 (UTC) |
Your comments and editing are aggressive and uncivil. ShulMaven ( talk) 17:40, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at 2014 Jerusalem synagogue massacre shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being
blocked from editing—especially if you violate the
three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three
reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
The article is part of
WP:ARBPIA and is under
WP:1RR.Please revert yourself.
Shrike (
talk) 04:35, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on
edit warring. The thread is
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:The_kyle_3 reported by User:Shrike (Result: ). Thank you.
Shrike (
talk) 04:37, 19 November 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. If you have questions, please contact me.Bbb23 ( talk) 06:19, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Greetings. I'm a host in the teahouse. FYI, you were mentioned in this question: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#Someone.27s_really_uncivil_to_me My first reaction to this question was that I didn't see anything uncivil in your (first few) comments on the talk page. Actually, I think you made some excellent points. One thing in particular another editor held up CNN as the most unbiased source. I think that is highly debatable and that in fact as Noam Chomsky and others have often said the Israeli press is often more honest about reporting violence in the region than the US and certainly than CNN which IMO has a clear right wing bias. It's just a bias that most Americans take for granted. Sorry... going of on a tangent; this is why I never edit political articles myself; my opinions are so strong it would be impossible for me to be objective. Anyway, the real point I wanted to make; and I hope you don't mind my sticking my nose in and giving you some completely unsolicited advise; is when you start calling people "likudniks" here you have already lost the argument. The kind of sarcasm and name calling that we take for granted on most other sites is just not acceptable here and once you do it anything else you say won't have nearly the influence with other editors as if you just stick to the facts and are always polite. I admire you for trying to edit these articles; I couldn't keep my emotions in check long enough to do it and I just wanted to suggest how you might be more effective in the future. -- MadScientistX11 ( talk) 16:32, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
118.201.50.156 (
talk) 05:08, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
I agree that this article is pretty dismal as it is now. However, you can't just blank it. You could WP:PROD it or take it to WP:AFD, but it looks like their are plenty of potential sources, so perhaps you should try to improve it instead. G S Palmer ( talk • contribs) 14:32, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Please
stop attacking other editors, as you did on
User talk:E.M.Gregory. If you continue, you may be
blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. —
Malik Shabazz
Talk/
Stalk 23:55, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:25, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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) 08:58, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Kindly refrain from removing appropriate categories and inserting inappropriate ones as you did just now at 2015 Shuvat Rachel shooting. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 17:08, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
You have just violated the 1RR at 2015 Shuvat Rachel shooting. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 19:34, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
You have such an interesting edit history. You wade into debates with a ferocious intensity, then disappear. But always on Israel/Palestine. I do wonder, do you also edit under other names? E.M.Gregory ( talk) 21:12, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on
edit warring. Thank you.
This is your only warning; if you make
personal attacks on other people again, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. —
Malik Shabazz
Talk/
Stalk 18:53, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Please note that the WP:BLP -policies also applies to all talk-pages. And BLP-issues are take *very* seriously here. Your edit here violates those policies, and you are very, very lucky if you are not blocked for it. Please revert it. Whatever your personal feelings about the man in question: please don't ever mention any characteristics about anybody without having a WP:RS backing you up. Huldra ( talk) 22:28, 9 August 2015
Your edit today at Duma arson attack, in which you added a faux quotation "lying Arabs", cited to an article in which those words did not appear, was reverted as a violation of Wikipedia policy. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 23:57, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
— Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 23:00, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
You have been warned many times about not engaging in personal attacks here. Comment on content, not the person, as you did at Talk:Israeli–Palestinian_conflict_(2015)#B._Late_2015_Israeli.E2.80.93Palestinian_unrest. You are really pushing your luck here. Kingsindian ♝ ♚ 21:07, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --
Bolter21 23:11, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for
your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with
Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the
reversion of clear-cut
vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you.
I am referring to edits such as [1], [2] and [3].
LjL ( talk) 23:48, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
As has already been explained, the Arbitration Committeee has approved discretionary sanctions on articles relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Under these discretionary sanctions, an uninvolved administrator can place blocks or bans as needed.
Because of your continual disruptive behavior, personal attacks, and edit warring in articles relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict, you are now topic banned from all pages relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict (broadly construed) until 00:00 UTC, 1 November 2016. That means no edits to articles, talk pages, or parts of other pages that have anything to do with the Arab-Israeli conflict. You may find more information at Wikipedia:Banning_policy#Topic_ban.
Obviously, you are welcome to edit elsewhere on the site, but any edits to topics broadly connected to the Arab-Israeli conflict will result in blocks of increasing length. If an edit violates this topic-ban and continues the pattern of disruptive or offensive behavior, the block could be indefinite. Ian.thomson ( talk) 09:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 17:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Vanjagenije
(talk) 17:02, 12 April 2016 (UTC)