This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
@Jem87: please remember to add your talk page comments at the bottom of the thread, it may otherwise be lost during archivation. I rescued your current remark for now. Cheers.GreyShark (dibra) 10:24, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maronites, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greek (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.
Please provide an indication of when you expect to explain your repeated bulk reversions on the above article. If you ignore this request again (for the third time) I will assume your behavior is intentionally disruptive. Oncenawhile (talk) 17:53, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Arab League, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Volley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Levite may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
<ref>Rivash" 15; "Divrei Yatziv" by R' Y. Halberstam, E.H. 6; "Yechaveh Da'at" by R' O. Yosef, V 61)</ref> stemming from her traditional eligibility to receive proceeds of the Levitical tithe ([[
Conservative/Masorti Judaism has not extended Torah honors to either a bat Kohen or a bat Levi (see Robert A. (Rafael) Harris, Rabbinical Assembly of Israel's Law Committee Teshuvah: “The First
* ''Urfali'' or ''Levi Urfali'' (also ''Levi Abud'', ''Levi Aslan'', ''Levi Hamami'' - an [[Urfalim]] community surname, which was
This is complex. Haganah was attached to Mapai and Palmah to Mapam as IZL was attached to revisionnists. Haganah and Palmah collaborated easily because Mapai and Mapam were very close on the ideological point of view. Pluto2012 (talk) 21:54, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries".
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBotoperator / talk23:57, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice is given by an uninvolved administrator and will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system.
I recommend installing a free dictionary http://wordweb.info/ for the next time somesome suggests your understanding is in error. A desktop "American Heritage Dictionary" is the Best English Dictionary I own. Oxford English Dictionary (OED) costs quite a bit more and is the only Superior option.
Dear @Callanec: I think you were greatly misled by Once on this issue. This is a curious semi-successful attempt to force minority view upon majority by strong wikilawyering. Once by the way knows me and my editing style very well, including a successful cooperation on Mandatory Palestine article (here) and semi-successful cooperation on the Kingdom of Iraq (here). I am herewith confident Once knows well that i don't edit wikipedia frequently and i don't tend to edit-war (except trolls and socks) and for some reason used my infrequent editing to bully against me as a "refusal to cooperate" in parallel with his aggressive editing (even though also reverted by 3 other users). Though i'm very active on Middle East refugee topics (i created Syrian refugees, Kurdish refugees, Expulsion of Egyptian Jews (1956) and Assyrian exodus from Iraq), i don't see any reason for myself to engage in any kind of dispute on Arbpia articles, thus i'm sanctioning myself for 1 year article ban on Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries (same as i did on Mandatory Palestine in similar circumstances). I call Once to do the same and cool off. Cheers.GreyShark (dibra) 18:40, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi, all I did in that article is reverting vandalism, by a new POV user, who only edited that article or similar articles. The user has been replacing established maps for Kurdish-inhabited area by an alarmingly fictitious one. Cheers. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 20:55, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello again,
An article's deletion following an AfD nomination occurs when the majority of votes are in favor of deletion, or does it depend on the points given in the discussion? In another sense, should i focus on discussing the deletion or should i rather work on improving the article? Because i recall this where the tag you placed said "consider improving the article so that it is acceptable according to the deletion policy" before you switched it to the current tag. What should i do in this case? Regards. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 07:01, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
@Fitzcarmalan: sorry for late response. It is usually important to gain a numeric majority, but quality of votes also counts. IPs are the least important and the more experienced editors give qualified reasons, the higher is the chance to approve/decline a proposal. The article is currently in AfD, but you can try to improve it, as long as you don't change the topic.GreyShark (dibra) 22:21, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Centuries in Lebanon
Re your comments re "modern Lebanon" being post-1946 on the category I created in 2010 Category:19th century in Lebanon, the Category:Centuries in Lebanon goes back to the 12th century in Lebanon with Lebanon in fact having a pre-20th century history; and the category is now a needed parent for more recent categories (not created by me) like Category:1898 establishments in Lebanon. The 2013 "consensus" you quote relates to Syria in particular changing some centuries to "Ottoman Syria" rather than Syria, and Lebanon was not mentioned (though some centuries in Lebanon could be included in "Ottoman Empire" categories). Hugo999 (talk) 04:06, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Using Sources
Thank you for clarifying sources. I will not make that mistake again with regards to academic and POV sources and ensure sources of information are accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jem87 (talk • contribs) 10:16, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
I thank you for your warning. Yes, I tried to reach a consensus via discussion on the talk page, and most editors, except that one, agreed to it. And yes we entered into an edit war all the while while I was trying to find a solution to the problem and trying to point to him the policy on unreliable sources and POV pushing. In the end I gave up because I found the other editor to be uncompromising. So, I've given up on the issue, hoping some other editor or administrator would be able to make that editor listen to reason and follow Wikipedia policy. And I am not going to be involved in the dispute any longer. I apologise if my actions caused trouble and will be more careful in the future to not let the situation get out of hand as it did. Once again, I apologise! EkoGraf (talk) 22:22, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
@EkoGraf: Actually, i'm sorry you got the official administrator warning; i know you make a good work on Syrian civil war articles, and i though my warning would be enough for the first time. Be careful not to breach 1RR, and remember to report such users.GreyShark (dibra) 18:18, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
2011-present Egyptian civil unrest
Do you think i should i go forward with the merging already? Or would it be better if i waited for a closing editor to confirm there is consensus? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 04:37, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
It seems you can, there doesn't seem to be any opposition. The only thing to consider is later renaming the Timeline article to "Egyptian civil unrest (2011-present)", which in my opinion is a much better descriptive title than just a "timeline".GreyShark (dibra) 18:20, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
The POV issue hasn't been addressed yet because Lihaas never explained why the tag is there and thinks it is easy to tag an article without any explanation and leave the editors wondering for maybe decades what could possibly be wrong. The POV fork issue and the naming issue have been addressed in the AfD discussion and in the move request respectively. I kept asking Lihaas what was the tag about and eventually told him after noticing his unwillingness to discuss that i would remove it if he keeps ignoring my comments. He took this as a threat (even though i did not intend to threaten and i'm sure he knew that) and he told me that the reason why it's there is because it is a POV fork, and like i said, this was already discussed in AfD.
Lihaas keeps insisting on the POV fork claim using only one argument: "revolutions need institutional changes" → Isn't that what happened? I mentioned Lihaas so he could discuss this in the article's talk page but he ignored my entries (again). I'm not trying to look like the bad guy here, but it's not the editors' fault if someone adds a tag without a clear explanation and i'm shocked that this kind of behavior comes from an experienced editor such as Lihaas. Even though both articles discuss completely different subjects, i think the reason behind all of this is because the it was created 8 months after the events took place, but with all honesty, do you find that relevant to the discussion?
I also don't want to impose a false dilemma here, but if a tag is necessary (though i don't think any is), then only one should be there. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 16:57, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
I would like to note that since i'm personally following the process, i don't vote any more. I simply observe and conclude.GreyShark (dibra) 17:23, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
And i won't vote myself anymore because i'm sick and tired of being accused of POV-pushing by some resident users who have proven to be POV-pushers themselves and never even tried to improve the article, as if the title was the biggest issue (i'm not talking about Lihaas here). I already explained my situation to Gigs before, and i'm sure he'll understand. I will comment however, when i find irrelevant entries. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 17:35, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
I mostly looked at the conclusion of closing the rename request which recommended to make another rename procedure with "protests" in title, hoping that would bring more support in the vote.GreyShark (dibra) 20:21, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
While you're finally online and since i explained to you the groundless nature of the tag, can you please revert Heroasawhole (whom i highly suspect of being a sockpuppet of Hans Franssen)? I don't want to engage myself further in an edit war because i fear i have accidentally violated the 3rr. I also don't want to deal with this user anymore and i've had it with those insults followed by sugar-mouthed and hypocritical apologies. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 18:05, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Sorry for being late, i visit wiki about twice to three times a month. I see that Franssen has indeed been a sock, good job for finding this out!.GreyShark (dibra) 19:06, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
I have reverted you. This was discussed during more than 1 year and you didn't even participate to the discussion. A minimum respect would be to open a discussion with Onceawhile about this before reverting him. Pluto2012 (talk) 11:50, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
You want to issue a complaint against me whereas I am one of the few contributors who supported some of your points of views and whereas you reverted an action that had been discussed by other contributors during 1 year ? Are you sure ?
You can lose your time in issuing a complaint but you'd better go and discuss with Onceawhile.
All i ask is a normal rename per WP:RM; i also don't agree with "pogrom" title, but the new title you insist is completely ridiculous. See the talk page of that article.GreyShark (dibra) 12:10, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
ongoing "slaughter of protesters" in Syria by Assad’s troops,<ref name="jpost" /> referring to the [[[civil uprising phase of the Syrian Civil War|Syrian uprising]].
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 1517 Hebron pogrom may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
{{merge to|{{merge to|Jewish communities during the 1517 Ottoman-Mamluk war|discuss=talk:1517 Safed
I think you may be misreading this, though admittedly I can't prove it. I think the word "there" on the end of the sentence refers to Tripoli and not to Safed. There are no "resident Egyptians" in the Safed story I think. This book mentions a blood-libel in Tripoli in 1834. Zerotalk07:31, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
@Zero0000: After reading it for the second and third time i see what you mean. I shall meanwhile remove it and try to find some other source, which is more clear.GreyShark (dibra) 18:08, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, that seems to be the source, but it adds an extra twist:
Koning Willem I spande zich voortdurend in voor de bescherming der joden. Hij kwam niet alleen op voor de belangen van de Nederlandse joden, maar ook voor die van de joden die niet tot zijn onderdanen behoorden. In 1834 had Daniële de Picciotto, onze vertegenwoordiger in het Syrische Tripolis, zich opgeworpen als beschermer van de joodse bewoners van Jaffa. In dat jaar trokken de Turkse inwoners plunderend door de joodse wijk. De Picciotto diende samen met zijn Engelse en Franse collega een scherp protest tegen deze gang van zaken in bij de onderkoning van Egypte. Als gevolg hiervan werden de daders door hem gestraft en werd de geleden schade verged.
My Dutch isn't any better than google translate, but it seems to be placing the trouble in Jaffa, not in Tripoli (though I can be misreading it). Anyway it was definitely not in Safed since that city is not mentioned in the whole article. I don't see "resident Egyptians" there either; the perpetrators are identified as Turks. I can probably find a Dutch speaker to verify it. Zerotalk20:22, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
He he, surprises surprises. There is an old Hebrew book, which is called "The history of Jews in Ottoman domain (Tograma)" - i would perhaps take a look one day to find out what is said there.GreyShark (dibra) 17:06, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
To expand Sinai insurgency to 2011-present Egyptian crisis = To add the 2011-present Egyptian crisis instead of both the Sinai insurgency and the Islamist unrest, right? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 16:30, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
I saw that you are an experienced editor and I need your help. Editor Tradedia not once rudely violates the 1RR rule and his actions are harmful. So you could then help?
Here are some examples:
I checked it - there seems to be no violation by Tradedia. Apparently, your calculation is not precise, as 1&2&3 (Mar21) are in fact considered consecutive reverts and counted as one revert; Mar.30 reverts are also consecutive and also are considered as one. If he does a revert, is reverted back and then reverts again within less than 24h, then it is a non-consecutive punishable violation. I advice you and others to be very careful with edit-warring, because that page may soon come under protection.GreyShark (dibra) 17:23, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Don't you think the same we did with Egypt should be done with Yemen's conflicts? I see 3 ongoing conflicts there and they're all mentioned separately in the article which might confuse some readers who will notice the map where Yemen is coloured in red but not mentioned in the major conflicts list.
Also, should i ask Rybec to include China in yellow? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 05:43, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Yemen is different from Egypt i think, there is no direct relations between Sa'ada insurgency in the North, Southern separatism and Islamic insurgency. Yemen is more similar to Philippines, where two different conflicts take place in different parts of the country. If you can find sources which talk about Yemen in concepts of general "civil war", then maybe we can join all three conflicts in Yemen as one. I agree on China - it should definitely be colored yellow because of Xinjiang.GreyShark (dibra) 16:14, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
The reason why i thought about Yemen in particular is because the Houthis and southern separatists have this kind of sympathy for each other and because al-Qaeda helped the government fight Houthis in some occasions. The tensions there emerged and became somehow linked because of the Yemeni Revolution. However, if you feel they are not related i will not bring this up again, but do think about it a little while you can.
Regarding the Philippines.. I thought Civil conflict in the Philippines was not added because the article is of poor quality and because it appears to be deletion-worthy. I agree that there is no link between the Moro insurgents and the communists in this case.
I forgot to ask Rybec to update the map, sorry. But while i'm at it, should i ask him to shade the Koreas and Paraguay as well? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 09:50, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
I did not really use Wikipedia as a source because the article sections that i referred to are already sourced and are being constantly updated. However, here is a source (though it might not be a reliable count) that put up the January death toll alone to 265. We can't keep adding tens of citations for each conflict's casualties. I'm just collapsing them for now but the amount of refs is ridiculous and the citation overkill issue still exists, even if buried. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 10:12, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
We should prefer references with good statistics and not counting ourselves, but we certainly shouldn't add "you can find it in nnnn article" - this is a violation of WP:WINARS. Better just to put "citation needed", than to say the source is a wikipedia article.GreyShark (dibra) 18:12, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Just for your information and without any idea behind : Tal Hai occured a month before the Jerusalem riots and Palestinian Arab manifested in Jerusalem against the Balfour Declaration in 1918, 1919 and each following year. Pluto2012 (talk) 07:52, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
LaraMagasin is most probably one of them. Also plenty of IPs edit-warred with me when I edited through IP, most likel all of them were HistoryNE sockpuppets. Help Needed. Thanks,--Abdul Alam Rahman (talk) 00:19, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Greyshark09, I understand that you are one of Wikipedia's best editors, and I would highly appreciate it if you could help make Joe Walsh's page a good article. Many thanks Joe Vitale 5 (talk) 07:34, 27 April 2014 (UTC).
Are you only going to canvass editors who have voiced opinions you agree with, have a hatred of me, and on Israeli pages? Or were you just planning to do all these first before contacting the numerous editors who supported the map change or watch Palestinian pages? Sepsis II (talk) 18:52, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
For your own information i'm also considered anti-Israeli as much as anti-Palestinian, anti-Iranian and anti-whatever is sensitive in the Middle East. Mainly i'm anti trolls, vandals and wikifallens.GreyShark (dibra) 18:56, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
user:Sepsis II, you accused me of canvassing, personal attacks (including spreading hatred) etc. Unless you issue a complaint against me this may be considered unbased accusations and hence a personal attack against me. Shall i complaint against you?GreyShark (dibra) 14:56, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm still waiting for you to file that complaint against me. Your attempt to get around your failed attack on the map of Israel on en.wiki by deleting the map on commons was funny though. Sepsis II (talk) 19:35, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Reference Errors on 30 April
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
have you ever read WP:FORK? Not even close. If you don't think the article should exist, nominate it at AFD. Otherwise, stop blanking content. And you're wrong in suggesting that there is a consensus to not having an article there. I would ask you to show any consensus you could find. Red Slash04:07, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pro-Russian insurgency in Donetsk region until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. RGloucester — ☎17:04, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello again,
I keep contacting some editors + no one responded to my request on the map workshop. Lately I've re-asked FutureTrillionaire to reconsider this, but in case it's a no go, do you know anyone willing to perform the changes required? Now we obviously have Ukraine, which adds to the waiting list, and we don't want to keep the map like this for long, do we? If I knew how to do it myself I wouldn't have hesitated, but unfortunately I don't. Can you help? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 17:56, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
A lots of things need to be updated, indeed. I currently don't have the software for SVG editing, but perhaps i will sometime soon. Meanwhile cannot implement myself.GreyShark (dibra) 17:31, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Yes I can understand that, but at the moment FutureTrillionaire is apparently busy and Rybec looks inactive, so I was just wondering if there was any editor you or I could contact about this? Thank you. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 17:39, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pro-Russian insurgency in Donetsk region, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page In absentia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.
Hi Greyshark, I waited for more than three weeks as would have preferred to have your input, but have now AfD'd the article. Oncenawhile (talk) 07:26, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Expulsion of Egyptian Jews (1956) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article..
Hi Greyshark, I waited for more than three weeks as would have preferred to have your input, but have now AfD'd the article. Oncenawhile (talk) 07:27, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Whole Palestine until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article..
Disambiguation link notification for May 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Whole Palestine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Transjordan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.
Hello, Greyshark09. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Reference Errors on 30 June
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Siege of Daraa may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kurdish separatism in Iran, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pahlavi. 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.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Assassination of Abdullah I of Jordan. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Abdullah I of Jordan#Assassination. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Abdullah I of Jordan#Assassination – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.
If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 01:18, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Not surprising, since it was a speedy deletion. Anyway, I can see your point: the event may very well merit a separate article. However, you should read Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia if you plan on copying the section already in the article. It might also be a good idea to then rewrite or remove the original text so that the new article actually provides more in-depth coverage of the topic. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 19:26, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Frankly i've only used the original text for the template and planned to expand the article based on academic sources, but i guess it won't happen now. I don't have the time to start it again anytime soon.GreyShark (dibra) 19:30, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Abu Nidal Organization, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Palestinian. 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.
is a '''list of wars that independent Syria has been involved in''' since 1944 (including periods of the [[Syrian Republic (1930–58)]], [[United Arab Republic]] (1958-61) and
Arab regimes of ethnic cleansing. Jerusalem Post, 25 Jun. 2003, JENNY HAZAN AND GREER FAY CASHMAN]</ref><ref name=JCPA>[http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=5&DBID=1&LNGID=1&
I have nominted your article Nagorno-Karabakh conflict for a mention at ITN as there has been an escalation in tensions between the countries in the last few days. --BabbaQ (talk) 16:28, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Greyshark09. You have new messages at Talk:West_Bank_(disambiguation). Message added 19:37, 14 August 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
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.
Greetings. I noticed that you added a proposal to the top of the Targeted killing page, looking to split a page off from the US section. I'd be interested in discussing this proposal, but I cannot seem to find a relevant section; did you simply forget to create such, or am I being stupid and not seeing something? Regards, Vanamonde93 (talk) 05:07, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Due apologies, you did actually do so; just that the discussion had died. In any case, I would be interested in giving this another shot; would you? If not, I rather think we should remove the template from the page. Vanamonde93 (talk) 05:14, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
@Dougweller: thanks for the notice. Sorry for being late, but apparently you have already reached an understanding on the topic. In any case, i strongly believe that ISIS topic is integrative to the Syrian Civil War and hence should be sanctioned. The second question whether ISIS subtopics are also relevant in regard to WP:SCWGS is of course blurred - i don't have an answer right now whether it is ok for somebody to put 1RR on Abu Baqr article (probably yes, but it is not as certain as ISIS article). In any case, it is obvious that at some point we would be required to amend the sanctions, because to borders of the Syrian / Iraqi / Lebanese conflict are increasingly blurred (with ISIS being behind much of this activity).GreyShark (dibra) 19:58, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I ended up agreeing, although I also think that the sanctions are going to need amending as the focus is shifting. Dougweller (talk) 20:41, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Hold on a second..
"The presence of these templates is not a prerequisite for issuing sanctions; however, users should be aware of sanctions before actually being sanctioned." There was no template present so I had no idea the article was under the scope, so how can you give a warning when I did not know? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:16, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I found the article only recently, and it has been there for months. I don't want to get into edit wars or anything. But since I got starting improving it, I don't think what he did was right.Ericl (talk) 20:21, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
I took the discussion to the talkpage and gave my resoning which you have not responded to yet, I admit I should not have reverted as much but had no idea that the article was under sanctions. I do not want to send the article to AfD as that should be the last resort. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:25, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Guys, the notice i issued to you is not a recorded official warning. However, next time you might be officially warned (recorded warning) or even blocked.GreyShark (dibra) 20:34, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Okay and understood, I take sanctions seriously and if I had seen the tag would have only reverted once, I should have just put (See talkpage) in my edit summary though. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:36, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Where is the community consensus saying that a map showing the "current military situation in Syria" cant show that Israel is occupying the Golan heights? According to the discussion at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Syrian_Kurdistan#Military_map_issues there is clear consensus that the Israeli-occupied Golan heights is to be shown in white and the Israeli occupation separated from the belligerents with a dotted line. The discussion you opened at Syrian civil war talkpage falsely misrepresents my position that I want Israel as a belligerent on Syrian Civil War maps. You also sent messages to a large group of editors misrepresenting my position. I haven't added Israel as a belligerent, and no one else has added that. Therefore the outcome in the discussion you opened is not valid in regards to this edit:[7], because they are not connected in any way. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 13:39, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
This is a map of Syrian civil war, not a map of Syrian Arab Republic (which practically reduced to several governorates in the West of former Syria).GreyShark (dibra) 18:36, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Balochi Language wiki test Wp/bcc
Hello Mr Greyshark09 !
I am admin of Balochi language wiki-test , I have a problem with Module of Location [8] in this wiki test, now I cannot fix other templates or articles , for example this article [9] , can you help me please for fixing this problem. Thanks a lot
Ibrahim khashrowdi (talk) 11:27, 18 September 2014 (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.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iturea and Trachonitis (tetrarchy) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.. Moonraker12 (talk) 12:41, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
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 message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.
Something very awkward happened here, and we need to go back to clarification and amendment with involvement of some administrators.GreyShark (dibra) 21:44, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Foreign relations of Syrian Kurdistan, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
[information is small enough to easily go in main article so no need for this]
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Jzlcdh (talk) 13:27, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Politics of Syrian Kurdistan, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
[info small enough to go in main article]
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Jzlcdh (talk) 13:33, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Politics of Syrian Kurdistan, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
[why is this redirect necessary?]
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Jzlcdh (talk) 16:15, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Foreign relations of Syrian Kurdistan, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
[why is this redirect necessary?]
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Jzlcdh (talk) 16:19, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arab Winter until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. - Cwobeel(talk)05:10, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arab Winter until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. - Cwobeel(talk)05:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
Reference Errors on 2 November
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Your agreement to have it mediated shows your willingness to compromise. It will be settled by Wikijudge. After this, Cwobeel's continued actions would be sanctioned. This should put the nail in the coffin on the debate over keeping or deleting. sudopeople22:06, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Arab Winter". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 26 November 2014.
Wikipedia editor AbderrahmanNajjar just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
You learn something everyday, even about your own region's recent history. Thanks. There's however a problem with your ref UN15194 [4], it's not defined
To reply, leave a comment on AbderrahmanNajjar's talk page.
Now the AE is behind us, i'd like to work to repair our relationship. Would you be interested in talking through the various points of concern you raised, and those that I have raised, so we can clear the air between us? Oncenawhile (talk) 19:18, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your proposal. I will get back to the Jewish exodus related pages in next year, following a year of self-ban on this topic. Nevertheless, i encourage you to refrain from edit-warring and removing reliable sources.GreyShark (dibra) 18:54, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Your third sentence ("Nevertheless...") is both inflammatory and patronising, so my belief that you may wish to clear the air is rapidly diminishing. If you want to clear the air, let me know, but since you didn't affirm this above I will assume that you do not want to do so. Oncenawhile (talk) 20:36, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
It feels to me that you think of wikipedia as a "battle" rather than as a collaborative project. Whilst collaboration requires trust (or as we call it WP:AGF), you appear to have lost the desire to even try to AGF.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wilayat Barqah (ISIL), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Derna. 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.
We have WP:RETAIN and WP:ERA os stop changing it to BCE/CE. We keep the existing format and the one the article originally started with, unless otherwise. Do it again and u will be reported. ༆ (talk) 05:20, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mosul, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Transjordan. 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.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wilayat al-Raqqa (ISIL) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:03, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Wilayat Al Sahel (ISIL), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:47, 29 December 2014 (UTC)