User talk:ТуманныйКот

Welcome!

Hello, AlmostDeveloper!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Grayfell (talk) 19:05, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

General Sanctions

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Syrian Civil War and ISIL. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Aaron Liu (talk) 21:25, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Original research

Please see Wikipedia:No original research; it is not appropriate to add your own interpretations or extrapolations to articles. All content must be directly supported by sources. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 10:23, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please kindly cite, where I've added non-sourced facts or interpolations of articles. AlmostDeveloper (talk) 10:54, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In your edits at Human rights in the AANES and your edit requests at Talk:Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria, you invoke "misandry" and "men's rights", but do not, from what I can tell, provide sources that connect the facts you cite with these ideas. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 10:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Misandry, by Wikipedia, is "hatred of, contempt for, or prejudice against men or boys". Men's rights advocacy, by Wikipedia, is "a focus on general social issues and specific government services which (...) adversely impact - or (...) structurally discriminate (...) men and boys". Sources I cite ("Only men are forced to die on wars", "There is prejudice against gay males", "Sexual violence against boys is underreported") show hatred, contempt for or prejudice against men or boys, so that falls under misandry definition, and talk about this falls under men's rights topic.

Still, you were very correct that I misunderstood the "hail" definition, so I've reverted/canceled edit requests at Talk:Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria. AlmostDeveloper (talk) 11:14, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Original research includes combining information from different sources to form a result that the sources do not individually support. You would need a source specifically saying that what happens in AANES is misandry/men's rights violations. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 11:24, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

gotcha, thank you AlmostDeveloper (talk) 11:25, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, 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.

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.

Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emphasis on the "does not imply that there are any issues with your editing". That said, it would help if you would keep proposals at talk until you're sure there's consensus. Usually people will pretty clearly state their support for your changes. The temptation to make a few adjustments and then reinsert disputed content is common, but it can lead to unnecessarily contentious revert wars. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're totally right. Thank you for so kind wording. I thought, we agreed consensus in talk with you - didn't we not? Or do you mean that I should wait for more comments from other people? This message was written with sincerely good intentions. AlmostDeveloper 18:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We didn't agree. Let me know (there, preferably) if there's a part of my comments you'd like me to clarify. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:04, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]