User talk:Ecpiandy

WP:1RR at Gaza genocide

Hi; at topics related to the Israel-Arab conflict, editors are restricted to one revert every 24 hours: An editor must not perform more than one reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes or manually reverses other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert.

You have made two reverts within a 24 hour period:

1. 00:16, 14 July 2024
2. 00:39, 14 July 2024

Please self-revert 00:39, 14 July 2024 to bring yourself back into compliance with this restriction. And FYI, as far as I know every RfC that has been held on the question has come to a consensus to include "Hamas-run" or similar terminology on the first mention of the Health Ministry, due to reliable sources considering this important information.

In addition, the "childish strikes through arguments people don't agree with" you removed were done because those editors were not extended confirmed; I encourage you to revert that as well, as such editors are forbidden from participating in the topic area. BilledMammal (talk) 00:46, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

The consensus is not for "Hamas-run" to be included. I reverted his initial edit back to what it was before. It is on you, not me, to stop pushing this change without consenus. Ecpiandy (talk) 00:54, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm popping in to say the same thing. You've violated 1RR. Also, please review WP:ECR for information about the extended-confirmed restriction that applies to the topic. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:54, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

No I reverted the initial edit which added the new text in. BilledMammal then reverted my revertion, hence taking it up to 2 Reverts. Ecpiandy (talk) 00:56, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

You made a reversion, you were reverted, them you made a second reversion. That is a violation of WP:1RR. Please self-revert. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:57, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

FYI, when you self-revert I'll partially self-revert to remove the aspects I agree are problematic. Sorry for not doing so initially - I overlooked some of the aspects of your edit. Hopefully that will make you more willing to self-revert? BilledMammal (talk) 00:57, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Urm yeah it is better to talk through on talk page, I'd keep the "Hamas-run" and "Like in all wars" part out for now if it's up to me as seems a big step to keep in, if those are the problematic parts you are referring to. Otherwise yeah can self-revert and ask talk page. Ecpiandy (talk) 01:01, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Actually, I was referring to "Some sources have hypothesised that there may be" and "though it is not known who was responsible", but I'm happy to remove "Like in all wars" (true, and context is important, but that's a bad way to provide the context).

Hamas-run I'd prefer to keep, given previous consensus and the frequency of mention in reliable sources, but if it will help resolve this I'll self-revert that as well.

However, technically you do need to self-revert everything, and then I can self-revert those aspects to get them out again. BilledMammal (talk) 01:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Undone for now. Ecpiandy (talk) 01:13, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:15, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, and made the reverts we discussed. BilledMammal (talk) 01:19, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

In terms of the "childish strikes" thing, I was unable of this extended-confirmed rule so I have rollbacked that, thanks for letting me know. Ecpiandy (talk) 00:58, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

No problem, I see you're new to the topic area. BilledMammal (talk) 01:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

You have reverted several updates to the Gaza genocide, including edits that include important context such as what the ICJ Chief herself has stated regarding what the rulings mean. Please justify why you have removed these edits, or undo your edits. If you do not respond here, I will redo the edits and/or report you for violating 1RR. Thank you. Tobyw87 (talk) 05:28, 14 July 2024 (UTC)