User talk:RedEye98

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! MPS1992 (talk) 18:30, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Archeaogenticists

A tag has been placed on Category:Archeaogenticists requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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 "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 deleted 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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:06, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Hello, I'm Aranya. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Shahin Najafi, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. – Aranya (talk) 19:42, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Iranian atheism activists

A tag has been placed on Category:Iranian atheism activists requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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 "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 deleted 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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:51, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Ancient Greek occultists

A tag has been placed on Category:Ancient Greek occultists requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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 "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 deleted 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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:48, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Hindu–Arabic numeral system. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 08:40, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hindu–Arabic numeral system; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Kautilya3 (talk) 09:05, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ARBIPA sanctions alert

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 India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. 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.

Kautilya3 (talk) 19:14, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Template:Arabic culture. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. You ignored points in the discussion on the template's talk page. إيان (talk) 17:32, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Template:Arabic culture. إيان (talk) 17:47, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RedEye, I saw your request for arbitration. Understand; إيان is in no position to block you, even if they were an administrator as they are directly WP:INVOLVED. @إيان: and you however are both involved in an edit war, and this must stop immediately. Reverting each other is not a pathway forward, and both of you are one step away from violating WP:3RR which can and will get you blocked. 3RR is also not a bright line; people can be blocked before violating that for engaging in an edit war. The template is protected now for the next couple of days and neither of you can edit it. Hopefully discussion will continue at Template talk:Arabic culture. Understand; Arbitration is the last step of dispute resolution, not the first or second. See Wikipedia:Dispute resolution for more instruction on how to handle this dispute in an appropriate way. If either of you need help, please feel free to let me know. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 13:04, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hammersoft: Thank you for your intervention. Please notice that my first reverts were fixing page blanking, and that I opened a discussion on the talk page. I issued the warnings as RedEye98, forgoing consensus at the talk page, repeatedly broke WP editing etiquette, and has a history of doing so according to his/her talk page. إيان (talk) 13:23, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hammersoft: I have nothing to talk with he. In fact, he doesn't want to admit, so I stopped editing. On Wikipedia, these things are explicitly reported as "Islamic" or "in the medieval Islamic world", not "Arabic", so this is abuse of Wikipedia. Parts of other ethnicities have also been attributed to the Arabs for being Muslim. I think it's better Wikipedia deciding. Does Wikipedia have a policy for racism and ultranationalism? RedEye98 (talk) 15:10, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Ghazali

A tag has been placed on Category:Ghazali requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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 "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 deleted 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:57, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Attributing the achievements of other ethnic groups to the Arabs

In response to your request for arbitration of this issue, the Arbitration Committee has agreed that arbitration is not required at this stage. Arbitration on Wikipedia is a lengthy, complicated process that involves the unilateral adjudication of a dispute by an elected committee. Although the Committee's decisions can be useful to certain disputes, in many cases the actual process of arbitration is unenjoyable and time-consuming. Moreover, for most disputes the community maintains an effective set of mechanisms for reaching a compromise or resolving a grievance.

Disputes among editors regarding the content of an article should use structured discussion on the talk page between the disputing editors. However, requests for comment, third opinions and other venues are available if discussion alone does not yield a consensus. The dispute resolution noticeboard also exists as a method of resolving content disputes that aren't easily resolved with talk page discussion.

In all cases, you should review Wikipedia:Dispute resolution to learn more about resolving disputes on Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia community has many venues for resolving disputes and grievances, and it is important to explore them instead of requesting arbitration in the first instance. For more information on the process of arbitration, please see the Arbitration Policy and the Guide to Arbitration. I hope this advice is useful, and please do not hesitate to contact a member of the community if you have more questions. CThomas³ (talk) 16:38, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Algebra, you may be blocked from editing. Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 21:30, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Algorithm, you may be blocked from editing. Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 21:33, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. You have posted basically the same screed to several pages that have nothing whatsoever to do with resolving the matters that you raise. These include:

These are just the ones that I have noticed today; I see that there have been others in the last few days. The one that you posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case was particularly badly considered. If you have a problem with edits to Template:Arabic culture, you should be discussing the matter at Template talk:Arabic culture - and nowhere else. Also, before starting a Request for Comment, please read and understand WP:RFCBEFORE and WP:RFCST. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop misusing the {{rfc}} tag, as you did here. There was no statement, and no timestamp (or signature); both being contrary to WP:RFCST, to which I have already directed you. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:22, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:03, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Iranian ethicists has been nominated for merging

Category:Iranian ethicists has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. - car chasm (talk) 03:05, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Israeli social commentators has been nominated for renaming

Category:Israeli social commentators has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 21:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]