User talk:KasimMejia

.

KasimMejia, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi KasimMejia! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like GreenMeansGo (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:06, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

2019 Rojava offensive

I would kindly ask that you cancel your edit here [1]. Wikipedia has strict policy regarding Verifiability. At this time, all sources regarding the civilian deaths state they were killed due to Turkish strikes, not Syrian rebel strikes. Edits based on our personal opinions, if not backed-up by sources, are not permitted by Wikipedia and its considered a violation of Wikipedia's policy on unsourced Original Research. Thanks in advance! EkoGraf (talk) 15:07, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Okay. KasimMejia (talk) 15:11, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. If sources present themselves confirming civilian deaths due to TFSA strikes we can add them. EkoGraf (talk) 15:22, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Why is a reliable source needed to term the Rojava offensive a Turkish invasion of Northern Syria?? I'm just basing this off of the definition of the word invasion itself and the Wikipedia article of that name. Around half of the sources out there have labeled it an invasion including this FoxNews article: https://www.foxnews.com/world/turkey-syria-invasion-special-forces-soldier-kurds and guardian article: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/10/kurdish-australians-families-syria-abandoned-turkish-invasion. I can give you 20 more if I looked further, but point is around a quarter or more articles out there have labeled it an invasion. Only Turkish nationalists and Erdogan are upset at the use of the word invasion. We should be objective and not appease one side over another. User178198273998166172 (talk) 17:00, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Okay you can revert me, I just think its not the correct word due to the controversy surrounding it. Other users might try to revert you too. KasimMejia (talk) 17:03, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

October 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring, as you did at 2019 Rojava offensive. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ST47 (talk) 20:17, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

@ST47: I know you can't undo my block but can you do some updates at the article 2019 Rojava offensive, if I don't do it no one will apparently. Civilians casualties in Turkey have risen to 7 killed, including 5 children, would appreciate if you include the 5 children in the 10 October section [2](source). Turkish armed forces suffered their first casualty 1 KIA 3 WIA, would appreciate if you add this under Per Turkey [3](source). Again repeating, no one will apparently update the article since I'm blocked. KasimMejia (talk) 06:09, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Please read this notification carefully, it contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

A community decision has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

KasimMejia (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I was not aware that 1RR applied to different reverts as well rather than the same, revert. I was not previously warned about it, I know the block is short but I am very active on a recent event article and %100 won't make any more reverts. KasimMejia (talk) 05:28, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Accept reason:

It does indeed look like you were unaware of the 1RR restriction while making the reverts. I understand your claim to mean that you will do no more reverts (0RR) for the remaining duration of the block (therefore, the block is no longer necessary), and after that, you will abide by 1RR where required. As such, I have lifted your block. Welcome back, and thank you for your calm unblock request which addressed the concerns. Yamla (talk) 10:49, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. KasimMejia (talk) 11:28, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

PA's

As to PA's "Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence. Serious accusations require serious evidence. Evidence often takes the form of diffs and links presented on the wiki.", given that I did not mark either Turkish source as VF yours was an unfounded accusation.Slatersteven (talk) 14:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Lol, I told this user he has added original research and POV and now he is accusing me of serious accusations, who is accusing who? KasimMejia (talk) 14:06, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes you did accuse me of this, based upon you thinking that posting a VF tag after source A meant I also meant source B and C (even though they are after the tag) [[4]]. I have asked you not to make unfounded accusations, now I am warning you. If you continue to make these accusations I will report you. This is my last word in this matter.Slatersteven (talk) 14:09, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Oh wow okay, looks like you didn't add that to the Turkish source, nevertheless what's the point? I responded you about this at the article talk page as well. You shouldn't get so quickly offended, after all I just said it was POV and OR. KasimMejia (talk) 14:11, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

If you keep up this attitude [[5]], especially when your interpretation of policy is wrong, you are going to get blocked.Slatersteven (talk) 14:07, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Tendentious

I would advise reading wp:tendentious, you need to read that ANI and what has been said on the article talk page and take it as a warning sign. I think the tone of the ANI (I may be wrong) expressed a degree of frustration I have rarely seen in response to a first report.Slatersteven (talk) 13:38, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

You know I actually deleted that ANI 5 minutes after opening it but you restored it. So you shouldn't accuse me for it, I deleted it shortly afterwards. ---- Actually now checking, it looks like I forgot to delete it but instead deleted the notification instead from your page. [6] KasimMejia (talk) 13:40, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Meaning you need to take more care. Its mistakes (and accusations) like this that a part of the problem. Whilst I may not always agree with it this is a standard many edss expect wp:CIR.Slatersteven (talk) 13:45, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

edit war

Consecutive edits count as one edit.Slatersteven (talk) 14:05, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

You may have pushed well beyond 1rr [[7]] [[8]] [[9]], there are more but i'll stop there. note altering any edit is a revert.Slatersteven (talk) 12:09, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

dude what? First one is an update on casualties, that's not a revert. The second one I self reverted [10],[11] and that last one is just improving wording. I think you need to read this better Wikipedia:Edit warring#Other revert rules as well as Wikipedia:Edit warring#Exemptions. KasimMejia (talk) 12:14, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

A revert "An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert." thus it counts as a revert, you undid another users edits. It does not matter if you are "updating casualties" its still a revert. this [[12]] is another one, want more?Slatersteven (talk) 12:20, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

If you undo one more edds edits in the next 24 hours I will report you.Slatersteven (talk) 12:12, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Wow, that edit I took out an old source that said clashes were ongoing and replaced it after its capture. I literally used the same website that the user had used. (SOHR). Please report me because I think admins will warn you instead of me for these accusations. KasimMejia (talk) 12:30, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

@Slatersteven: Wow, go ahead and report me. I didn't do a single revert at that article today, also read Wikipedia:Assume good faith KasimMejia (talk) 12:16, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

I said when I would, but will now revise, if you undo or reverse any 2 edits over any given 24 hour period I will report you.Slatersteven (talk) 12:20, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Just go ahead and report me now because I really wonder what an admin will think of your bad faith behavior. KasimMejia (talk) 12:21, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

I am required to warn you you are edit warring first, I have now done so.Slatersteven (talk) 12:39, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Wow, unbelievable. Do you think I'm reverting somebody? Do you think I'm editing in bad faith? KasimMejia (talk) 12:43, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Talk to move page Rojava

Hi, I have noticed your interest in topics related to Syria. We are currently having a move discussion here and your contribution would be most welcome. Cheers, Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 07:33, 19 October 2019 (UTC)