User talk:Wikiejd2

Welcome!

Hi Wikiejd2! I noticed your contributions to Irish soviets and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Meanderingbartender (talk) 15:51, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Peerage of Ireland and related matters

Hi, and as I see you are still in the 30-something edit range, I add my welcome to the above, and can only say that we always have plenty for editors to do. That said, you might need to hold off on the peerage-related edits. There are many related articles, and you seem to have an opinion which diverges from the consensus on these matters, and which would require debate before continuing wide actions. It is not in dispute that the Irish Constitution does not give any substantive recognition to the old titles, and puts a condition on the acceptance of new titles (there are distinctions between peerages, knighthoods and baronetcies vs post-nominal awards such as MBEs / OBEs) but this has never been interpreted as barring the succession, for those who wish, of peerages, and said succession has continued through the life of our republic. What people make of them, including whether some think them an affectation, is not our business in the encyclopedia (though a well-referenced section on it in the relevant general article could work) - their existence is a fact. Further editing on non-factual / opinion-driven lines without strong supporting sources would be disruptive. SeoR (talk) 23:09, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your welcome. I hope to contribute as I can to articles, especially around Irish history, some of which seem to be written from a colonialist point of view. I agree that a section should be added to the general article about the legality of titles.

It is actually incorrect to say that their existence is a fact. Could you provide evidence to suggest that the current British government administration supports the inherited nature of some of these titles (MBEs etc are a different matter, though morally repulsive)?

My opinion does not diverge from the consensus of Irish people, only from that of British wikipedians who naturally make up the majority of those providing upkeep on British titles of nobility.

All my edits are factual driven, from the main overarching fact that Ireland gained independence in 1923, and became a republic in 1937. There's no opinion to have on that. Either you accept that Ireland is independent or you don't. It would be like a Russian wikipedia entry on the Baron of Kiev (Kyiv). Completely ludicrous in contemporary times to pretend that a foreign power still has any claim to these lands. If I called myself Duke of Manchester, while living in Galway for example, that would be laughed at.

I'm not sure what debate could be had on this matter, provided the person accepts the legitimacy of the Irish constitution, but I would be happy to engage with this, as I am providing these edits in good faith.

I strongly believe in the need to combat disinformation. Any person unfamiliar with Ireland would be confused by the current articles around Anglo-Irish so-called noblemen. They would be lead to believe that the United Kingdom still has any connection with the republic. This would be going against the spirit of Wikipedia. Wikiejd2 (talk) 07:44, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Insertion of personal opinion and synthesis

Note that Wikipedia is not a soapbox for you to insert your own personal opinions, synthesis and original research into articles. Making claims that terms are misused without references stating this is soapboxing. Note that Wikipedia is not the place to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. Canterbury Tail talk 13:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not disrupt my talk page to prove a point with your own personal opinions. Please point to any edit I made that contained original research. Wikiejd2 (talk) 16:01, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing

Please to not disrupt Wikipedia to make a point, as you have been doing by removing references to British Isles wherever you can and even edit warring on the removals. This is considered disruptive editing.

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Canterbury Tail talk 14:43, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, 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.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

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.

FortunateSons (talk) 17:16, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi Wikiejd2! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

I've noticed that you've expressed an interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Unfortunately, due to a history of conflict and disruptive editing it has been designated a contentious topic and is subject to some strict rules.

The rule that affects you most as a new or IP editor is the prohibition on making any edit related to the Arab–Israel conflict unless you are logged into an account and that account is at least 30 days old and has made at least 500 edits.

This prohibition is broadly construed, so it includes edits such as adding the reaction of a public figure concerning the conflict to their article or noting the position of a company or organization as it relates to the conflict.

The exception to this rule is that you may request a specific change to an article on the talk page of that article or at this page. Please ensure that your requested edit complies with our neutral point of view and reliable sourcing policies, and if the edit is about a living person our policies on biographies of living people as well.

Any edits you make contrary to these rules are likely to be reverted, and repeated violations can lead to you being blocked from editing.