User talk:عمرو بن كلثوم/Archive1

Warnings

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Meir Kahane, you may be blocked from editing.

Please do not attack other editors, as you did here: User talk:Vicky Ng. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Ijtihad, you may be blocked from editing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.250.25 (talk) 14:22, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

October 2010

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Meir Kahane. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. 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 edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:02, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Random Smiley Award

For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award.
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

♠TomasBat 20:02, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lupin

The Judean Mountains range in both Israel and Palestine. The contributing photographer, however, specified this one is in Israel. http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/File:Lupinus_pilosus_1.JPG That is why I reverted and am reverting again. We can ask an administrator to cast final judgement if you disagree. MartinezMD (talk) 03:11, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Levant

Thanks for your note. There are several issues here. If your only concern is including the Arabic name, then you should only edit that aspect of the article -- blanket reverts (reverting both things you disagree with and anything else that has been changed in the meantime) are not productive. What's more, all edits should include an edit summary explaining the rationale for the edit. As for the particular issue here, the Arabic name is discussed in the article Greater Syria, and mentioned in the lead as "the historic area called Syria, Greater Syria, or the Bilad al-Sham". Thanks, --Macrakis (talk) 15:34, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

October 2011

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Meir Kahane. 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.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
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; 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. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:12, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

مرحبا

كيف الحال؟ If I may be so presumptuous as to offer a bit of advice. Do not get in to personal discussion at AN/I. There are users who mindlessly interject with some inane comment that they think is either incredibly clever or stunningly hilarious. Those comments are often best ignored. nableezy - 01:12, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another bit of presumptuous advice: on your user page you have several quotations taken from other users' user pages. It is good practice to acknowledge where you got them from, firstly because technically Wikipedia's copyright licence requires it, and secondly because it's just good manners to thank people who've helped you. You could do this between <small> ... </small> tags. --NSH001 (talk) 02:17, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your userpage

Please note that your userpage appears to be in contravention of WP:USERPAGE. Specifically, WP:UPNOT states that userpages should not include substantial content unrelated to Wikipedia. The guideline goes on to state that this includes, but is not limited to:

Extensive discussion not related to Wikipedia
Extensive writings and material on topics having virtually no chance whatsoever of being directly useful to the project, its community, or an encyclopedia article

You appear to be using your userpage to host a substantial list of quotes to make a political point about the Middle East conflict, which is not what Wikipedia is for. Please consider removing the content in question. Singularity42 (talk) 03:23, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and just to be clear, I am approaching this from a neutral point of view. I take the same viewpoint for users using their userpage to make political points on the Middle East conflict from the other side as well. See, for example, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:DeeCeeVee. Singularity42 (talk) 03:33, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

اهلان يا عمرو بن كلثوم, regarding Singularity42's message above, WP:USERPAGE does allow a limited amount of material stating a user's political opinion, and there are plenty of user pages which state such opinions and are allowed, not least those pages from which you have drawn some of your quotations. So in principle, I would support your right to keep your user page. There is one very important proviso, however, and that concerns the very first section of your page, headed "Master Race and Chosen People", because it is anti-Semitic. Any statement of the form "all Jews are <some unfavourable description>" is, in my view, anti-Semitic (as well as being untrue and a logical fallacy). The fact that you have taken these alleged quotations from Jews does not negate their anti-Semitic nature. You then draw all these alleged quotations together into a single section, so as to emphasise the same unfavourable impression about all Jews. Fortunately there are many Jews who oppose Zionism, not least User:RolandR here on Wikipedia. If you remove this section from your user page, then I will happily support your right to keep the rest of it. --NSH001 (talk) 11:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not suggesting userpages can't contain a limited degree of reference to the user's political position. For example, I'm not suggesting the userboxes be removed. Users should be allowed to make make reference to their political position as it has the potential of having an affect on the person's involvement with editing Wikipedia articles. If it becomes substantial to the point of becoming advocacy for a political position, then it is a WP:SOAPBOX issue, and inappropriate. The substantial use of tying quotations together on this userpage in my opinion crosses the line and is trying to use the userpage to make a substantial political point (as well as the overt antisemitism remarks that NSH001 has pointed out - antisemitic remarks are antisemitic regardless of the background of who makes them). Singularity42 (talk) 11:26, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's a judgement call how much is acceptable. Get rid of that first section, and it's well with de facto limits. --NSH001 (talk) 14:37, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually although I see where you are coning from, and I agree that stereotyping is wrong, and I know there are many good Jews out there who stand up against occupation and oppression (Naom Chmosky, Uri Avniri, Norman Finkelstein, Yael Dayan, Ilan Pappe, etc.). Still, I not not exposing here my own beliefs, but I am rather taking quotes from prominent Jewish political (including PM of Israel) and financial figures, not writers or historians. If Begin is depicting the rest of the World as insects, I fail to see how this is anti-semitic. I have changed the title and deleted parts of that section and other sections. I hope this helps. عمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 16:36, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, no. For the most part, you are not taking quotes of important political figures (nor, as I said above, do I agree that is an appropriate use of a userpage anyway). What you are doing is quoting other people who are claiming to quote the political figures. A brief read of those articles indicates that there is a dispute whether those quotes are accurate. So to post something that could come across as antisemitic, and then claim it is not because another figure claims to have heard could still be considered inappropriate - especially for a Wikipedia userpage, which is not a webhost. Singularity42 (talk) 11:00, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:عمرو بن كلثوم

User:عمرو بن كلثوم, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:عمرو بن كلثوم and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:عمرو بن كلثوم during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Singularity42 (talk) 14:27, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Damascus Eyalet, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saida (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:18, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Inside (1996 film)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Inside (1996 film) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 21:15, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The figure of Arabic people in Turkey

Look to the talk page! Sero1988 16:33, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

عمرو بن كلثوم (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

No 3 edit violation, just reverted vandalism, like other users on that page. You should have checked page history before taking your decision

Decline reason:

I see several reverts you made on Arabs in Turkey. Edit warring is not permitted on Wikipedia. Changes must be discussed, instead of playing of tug-of-war on an article. TN X Man 17:25, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Please see WP:NOTVAND and Wikipedia:Most people who disagree with you on content are not vandals. Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:17, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What I reverted here was vandalism, not a contribution. The two other reverts I had in the past 2 days were reverting vandalism by an IP user, who was changing numbers taken from a reference, without adding another source to their numbers. PLEASE check the history of the article first. عمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 17:53, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

March 2012

Your recent editing history at Al-Jazari shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Scopecreep (talk) 14:11, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

pan arab beetle

im gone undo any page you change arabic iq is about 40!! every time they block me im gone use my magic to kick your arabic butt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.100.178.69 (talk) 14:39, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please stop lying?

I am truly hurt by the way you're claiming city's that are, and have always been Kurdish were Arabic. You've got no proof. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.109.78.28 (talk) 10:04, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]