User talk:Courcelles: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:02, 4 May 2018

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120
121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130
131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140
141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150
151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156

This page has archives. Sections older than 15 days may be automatically archived by .

@evleaks

You create protected @evleaks. Could you please redirect it to Evan Blass? (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:56, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, G4'ed the new article as a pretty blatant non-repair of all issues raised at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/@evleaks. Courcelles (talk) 00:12, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for G4 then, I was not aware that it had the same issues. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 10:59, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, I just noticed this after replying to Emir. I'm not going to make a big deal out of it, except to suggest that my notability has increased quite a bit since the original @evleaks article mentioned here was deleted. Please take a look at the following profiles to decide for yourselves:

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-28882046

http://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias/2014/08/140825_tecnologia_perfil_rey_filtraciones_evan_blass_ig

http://www.ibtimes.sg/daring-life-worlds-renowned-tech-leaker-evan-blass-16601

https://hipertextual.com/2014/08/evleaks

http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Layout/Includes/CREST/ArtWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=CREST&BaseHref=TCRM%2F2013%2F05%2F11&ViewMode=gif&PageLabel=14&EntityId=Ar01300&AppName=1-accessdate=24

https://shifter.pt/2017/03/evleaks/

https://www.androidpolice.com/2013/06/28/evleaks-revealed-android-polices-exclusive-interview-with-evan-blass-the-man-behind-evleaks/

https://techguru.fr/2016/08/09/evan-blass-portrait/

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2017/08/09/new-iphone-8/

https://www.killerfeatures.com/evleaks-interview

EvanBlass (talk) 11:59, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Some of those are compelling (but note at least two I checked are not in the article I deleted!) Can this wait until I get home later today and have time to read them fully? I'm thinking about sending it to a procedural AFD at this point. Courcelles (talk) 12:07, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. I do think that more opinions here would be helpful, thanks. EvanBlass (talk) 19:21, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see any version of the article now as it has been deleted, but perhaps restoring it and moving it to the draft space could be an option? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:49, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see the article has been restored. Was this so that it could be moved to the draftspace or do you think this issues have been resolved? If you think they have been resolved could you please create the redirect? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:25, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If someone could add those sources to the article, we could be done with this forever. Courcelles (talk) 16:32, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try and get them added in. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:51, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Courcelles: I have added the sources mentioned above into the article. Could you please turn @evleaks into a redirect? (please mention me on reply; thanks!)

Done. Courcelles (talk) 14:53, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling Bee

You've protected the 91st National Spelling Bee page. You said it was a violation of the privacy living persons, but each and every one of these people have signed a press release form, which makes this legal according to wikipedia laws.

Not true, it may be legal to publish the names in terms of real law, but it is absolutely against Wikipedia's WP:BLP policy. Courcelles (talk) 19:13, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is neutral, so do you mean that I need to provide a source?

No source will be good enough. You are not going to publish a long list of non-notable children's names on this website, full stop, end of discussion. Courcelles (talk) 19:21, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you to say they're not notable? Wikipedia's laws say that it only has to be one event. You just have to speak of them in an unbiased way. It is just a list of names, so get over it. Erfson (talk) 23:50, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NSPORTS They're not notable. Courcelles (talk) 23:55, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They are notable, it says there must be reliable secondary sources about the person(s), which there are. Second of all, http://ghosttrick.wikia.com/wiki/Ghost_Trick_Wiki:Protected_page says "Do not protect a page you are involved in an edit dispute over. Admin powers are not editor privileges - admins should only act as servants to the user community at large." Also, someone clearly hasn't read the five pillars of Wiki.

First, I'm not involved. 2) This is Wikipedia, please look at our own protection policy. And you seem to be missing WP:BLPNAME, which is policy here. Courcelles (talk) 14:11, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I made this list back when I was still very new to Wikipedia, and sources were alien to me, but now I know how to use them, but when this expires in two months, I'll come back, but I promise it will be with the proper sources. Erfson (talk) 18:08, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Abiodun Williams

Thanks for protecting Abiodun Williams. Any reason you didn't restore the deleted, sourced information that was removed by the anon IP? Best, Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 03:16, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I never revert when protecting unless absolutely necessary; I just protected the version I happened to find. Courcelles (talk) 13:12, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Gotcha, thanks for the answer. Best, Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 17:00, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm not very good at using wikipedia, so apologies if I am doing this incorrectly. Would it not be better to restore the version of the page including the section discussing the failure of The Hague Institute? As others have pointed out, it is well-sourced. There seems to be a concerted effort from Tufts University (or even Abiodun Williams) to bury this controversy but it has been a scandal that has been the subject of several newspaper articles, as well as being debated in the Dutch parliament. It would be odd to omit it entirely from the Abiodun Williams wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justice Expert (talk • contribs) 21:04, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just wait a week. The protection will be lifted after 25 April 2018. Best regards,Jeff5102 (talk) 06:58, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Someone wishing to re-add negative BLP information needs to go through and evaluate that all sources are reliable, that the sources used reflect a consensus of the sources available, and that all the information is in line with those sources. Quite frankly, I don't have time myself, but will drop the protection to semi if someone vows to do that before reverting. Courcelles (talk) 16:49, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I work for a media analysis firm and I'm a native Dutch speaker, all info is correctly cited and come from credible sources (Institutional Dutch media and official documents of the Dutch Parliament). Anon seems to have differences with the media who published the articles, if that's the case he needs to settle that with the media not here. As long as anon user from Tufts doesn't win a court case for libel against these media and politicians, we can presume that the information is correct and shouldn't be removed. Best regards,Stadswacht1 (talk) 12:58, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sam Cooke

Your protection of Sam Cooke was reverted by a bot. Tapered (talk) 04:29, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The protection itself just expired, the protection template was what was removed by the bot. The bot doesn't have admin powers and can neither protect or revert protection on a page. Courcelles (talk) 04:30, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks! Have some pasta.
  Tapered (talk) 23:46, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - And thanks for the protection. Tapered (talk) 00:58, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection

Might be a good idea to lock the World News Today and BBC News at Ten pages. -KH-1 (talk) 06:44, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Courcelles (talk) 06:45, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Malta at the 2018 Winter Olympics

The article Malta at the 2018 Winter Olympics you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Malta at the 2018 Winter Olympics for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Nova Crystallis -- Nova Crystallis (talk) 15:02, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hey, thank you for protecting Group Animal. I think I forgot to thank you for passing The High Road to China last month, so thank you for that. Also, do you think we should finish User:Courcelles/List of accolades received by Far from Heaven this year? I believe it just needs a lead. - JuneGloom07 Talk 17:07, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, we should finish Far From Heaven this year. And I think you've got a pretty credible GAN in Group Animal. Always good to see your face. Courcelles (talk) 17:16, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Block evasion

No tienes permiso para modificar esta página, por el siguiente motivo:

Tu nombre de usuario o dirección IP ha sido bloqueada.

El bloqueo lo hizo Courcelles. La razón dada es Checkuser blocks.

   Inicio del bloqueo: 17:59 8 feb 2018
   Caducidad del bloqueo: infinito
   Bloqueo destinado a: Vanherboal

Puedes contactar a Courcelles o con otro de los administradores para discutir el bloqueo. No puedes utilizar la función «enviar correo electrónico a este usuario» a menos que tengas una dirección de correo electrónico válida registrada en tus preferencias de usuario y la función no haya sido también bloqueada.

Tu dirección IP actual es 84.125.41.7, y el identificador del bloqueo es #8193220. Incluye todos los datos aquí mostrados en cualquier consulta que hagas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.52.125.86 (talk) 13:31, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I"m not sure I understand what it is you want? Courcelles (talk) 13:35, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SmileDirectClub

Hello! Can you help me understand why the SmileDirectClub page was deleted last night? When I looked yesterday, there were 2 votes to delete and 4 to keep the page. Why did the delete votes win? The page was originally flagged because a user affiliated with Smile Direct Club made updates to the page, which is apparently against policy. Can you explain what the preferred policy is for making factual updates to a page? As far as I understand, the user only updated out-of-date information, including old prices. To me, it seems like making those factual updates is more in keeping with Wikipedia's policies than removing the page altogether. Now it's no help to anyone! Really looking forward to learning more about the rationale for this and the appropriate way to correct factual inaccuracies. 173.128.144.63 (talk) 15:00, 24 April 2018 (UTC) Thank you![reply]

AFD isn't a vote, so you can't just count heads and close a discussion. (If we are counting snouts, it was 3-4; the nominator counts as a vote for deletion; not 2-4) It is a battle of ideas, a debate on policy. One side had a policy leg to stand on, the other did not. Namely that WP:CORP was not satisfied by the article in question. The keep side argued that some promotional content had been removed, not refuting the central point of the nomination. Courcelles (talk) 16:09, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you for explaining that. Can you tell me more about the process for making factual updates to existing content? If a person affiliated with the subject of the article isn't allowed to make updates personally, how are factual changes supposed to be made per Wikipedia policy? Obviously, another person can be tapped in to act on behalf of the organization, but that's not exactly kosher. Is there a way Smile Direct Club could have reached out to update factual inaccuracies by the book? Thanks again.

Sure, there's a whole Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Courcelles (talk) 16:32, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, very helpful. Would you consider re-instating the Smile Direct Club page as it was before the editor with the COI made changes, with the promise that the organization will follow the correct editing procedures moving forward?

That doesn't solve the issues of notability, though. Courcelles (talk) 14:12, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Iveta Mukuchyan

Please see note on your DYK review. Yoninah (talk) 20:10, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point, but I'm not sure that's actually a rule? Courcelles (talk) 20:31, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of New Zealand at the 2014 Winter Paralympics

The article New Zealand at the 2014 Winter Paralympics you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:New Zealand at the 2014 Winter Paralympics for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The C of E -- The C of E (talk) 12:02, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Comments

My comments were not meant as a knock against you. You've done more recently and historically than I have (or likely will do) and yes even in the most distorted accounting you've been a net positive to GAR. I perhaps shouldn't have noted anyone as an example for that argument. I do so given that there was discussion on the talk page already about the short noms felt it could help illustrate a point about any individual nomination and the collective effect. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:19, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And I might have overreacted some, but it did feel like personal criticism -- I've been very deliberate to review more than I submit in this recent phase of my writing energy. Personally, I'd love a QPQ system where someone had to review one once they had five GA's to their name or something, or even a "5 nominations at a time" limit. But, yeah, it's always best to talk in generalities, not call out one set of articles as the problem. As to the length aspect, well, they're also fairly trivial to review. You could review any of them in ten minutes work, whereas it often takes me an hour or more to do a longer article properly. (Maybe I'm slow? Who knows?) Anyways, I'm rambling, Barkeep49, but sorry for getting a little defensive. Courcelles (talk) 22:26, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And I am equally sorry for the personal example when the general would have sufficed. 22:29, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of São Tomé and Príncipe at the 2008 Summer Olympics

The article São Tomé and Príncipe at the 2008 Summer Olympics you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:São Tomé and Príncipe at the 2008 Summer Olympics for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 12:21, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Project AMAD

Sourced information from the IAEA, the Gaurdian as well as literature was removed on the Project Amad article, and then a ARBPIA3 (the article has nothing to do with the Israel-Palestine conflict) was put on the article unjustly in order to not have the previously removed information restored to the page.

RedSparrow1 (talk) 14:16, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ARBPIA3 covers the entire Arab-Israeli conflict, not just the Palestinians in particular, despite the slightly misleading acronym. Courcelles (talk) 14:58, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think RedSparrow1 meant that Project Amad had nothing to do with Arab-Israeli conflict. Iran is clearly not an Arab country as you know. --Mhhossein ^talk 18:53, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Arab, but clearly within the broadly-construed language, I think. Someone would have to ask ArbCom for a current interpretation, which may differ than what I meant when I voted for it, which was that Iran would be part of it. Courcelles (talk) 19:00, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Iran is not part of the Arab world I see no reason for *ARBPIA3. RedSparrow1 (talk) 11:13, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Turkey at the 2014 Winter Paralympics

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Turkey at the 2014 Winter Paralympics you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 15:41, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Turkey at the 2014 Winter Paralympics

The article Turkey at the 2014 Winter Paralympics you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Turkey at the 2014 Winter Paralympics for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 16:01, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Brazil at the 2014 Winter Paralympics

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Brazil at the 2014 Winter Paralympics you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 18:21, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Brazil at the 2014 Winter Paralympics

The article Brazil at the 2014 Winter Paralympics you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Brazil at the 2014 Winter Paralympics for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 18:41, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Albania at the 2006 Winter Olympics

The article Albania at the 2006 Winter Olympics you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Albania at the 2006 Winter Olympics for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 23:40, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Albania at the 2010 Winter Olympics

The article Albania at the 2010 Winter Olympics you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Albania at the 2010 Winter Olympics for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 01:21, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Albania at the 2006 Winter Olympics

The article Albania at the 2006 Winter Olympics you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Albania at the 2006 Winter Olympics for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 12:01, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for List of 1968 Winter Olympics medal winners

On 3 May 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article List of 1968 Winter Olympics medal winners, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Romania won its only Winter Olympics medal at the 1968 Games in Grenoble, France? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/List of 1968 Winter Olympics medal winners. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, List of 1968 Winter Olympics medal winners), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pelé

Brazilian soccer player Pelé’s article are protected. I suggest include after his name the KBE order title that he owns. It should be like that: “Edson Arantes do Nascimento, KBE ...” Pietovte (talk) 04:42, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(The place to suggest this is on the talk page, not here. Courcelles (talk) 13:12, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Turkey at the 2014 Winter Paralympics

The article Turkey at the 2014 Winter Paralympics you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Turkey at the 2014 Winter Paralympics for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 14:41, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Brazil at the 2014 Winter Paralympics

The article Brazil at the 2014 Winter Paralympics you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Brazil at the 2014 Winter Paralympics for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dom497 -- Dom497 (talk) 14:41, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete my old user talk page

User talk:Pachisu124. And the one on Commons too. Because I was a moron a few years ago.

--Aneyh (talk) 16:41, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WE're generally not allowed to delete user talk pages, it is an explicit exception to WP:U1. Sorry. Courcelles (talk) 16:43, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How come? It's MY old talk page, that I don't want to see anymore. That's stupid. So could you at least delete my old user page instead? That's one's much stupider.

--Aneyh (talk) 23:07, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That I can do. But deletion of user talk pages isn't allowed. You are welcome, however, to blank it. Courcelles (talk) 23:11, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Block question

My account shows that I am NOT blocked from editing at Wiki.

When I attempted to add a section at The Salvation Hunters, a pop-up says I am blocked. But I could, nevertheless, make small edits, such as changing font in other parts of the article!

Can you shed some light on this? CerroFerro (talk) 18:14, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've got no clue. I wonder if you were using a highly dynamic IP and settled on one temporarily that was blocked. Because if you made edits, you aren't blocks, rather the edit rewrites an entire article or adds a single space, the blocking mechanism doesn't care... Courcelles (talk) 19:13, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA project

Hey there. I figured I would invite you, if you are interested, to work on Oceania at the Olympics articles with myself and Cameron11598. I recently finished Tuvalu with DatGuy, Cam is finishing up Marshall Islands, and we are now working on Guam at the Olympics (and Kiribati). I made a list on my user page of most of the Oceania articles, still need to add Australia and some other big hitters. I have done a couple of non-Oceania topics as well. If you are interested in collaborating on any articles, for WikiCup or otherwise, let me know. Thanks! Kees08 (Talk) 19:29, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to help make some GT's; sounds like great fun rather than just doing nations randomly. Courcelles (talk) 19:37, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Welcome to the Good Topic Olympic Oceanic Nations ~~cult~~ group --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 03:25, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Awesome! I would recommend either starting at the beginning of Guam and moving forward until we meet, or starting on whichever topic you want. If you want, I can try to do half of the topic. _{where did cameron even come from...} Kees08 (Talk) 05:14, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Project Amad

You protected this page from being edited by editors with less than 500 edits (like me), citing 'Arbitration enforcement'. Can you tell me what this means? Attack Ramon (talk) 15:59, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:ARBPIA3. Basically new editors aren't allowed anymore in the various ISraeli-Arab conflicts topic area. Courcelles (talk) 16:02, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 225: / Line 225: @@
 ==[[Project Amad]]==
 You protected this page from being edited by editors with less than 500 edits (like me), citing 'Arbitration enforcement'. Can you tell me what this means? [[User:Attack Ramon|Attack Ramon]] ([[User talk:Attack Ramon|talk]]) 15:59, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
+*See [[WP:ARBPIA3]]. Basically new editors aren't allowed anymore in the various ISraeli-Arab conflicts topic area. [[User:Courcelles|Courcelles]] ([[User talk:Courcelles#top|talk]]) 16:02, 4 May 2018 (UTC)