User talk:Hobbes090414

Welcome!

Hello, Hobbes090414! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages.

Getting Started
Introduction • Contributing to Wikipedia • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Get help at the Teahouse Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions Department directory Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Verifiability • No original research Reliable sources • Citing sources • Content guidelines What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sockpuppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper)
Things to do
Task Center • Be bold in editing Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Copy editing • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguation • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 20:00, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

Hello, I'm Lazylaces. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Zootopia—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Lazylaces (Talk to me) 05:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Jamie Muscato. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Philipnelson99 (talk) 03:42, 6 December 2023 (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.

TarnishedPath^talk 03:40, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Your additions to the lede of Susan Sarandon have been repeatedly undone, by various editors for various reasons. When you get into an edit warring situation like this, it is best to step back and seek to form consensus on the talk page. Additionally, the material you are seeking to put in at the very least borders on edits that you are not allowed to do under the contentious topics limits described above. I highly recommend you step back from these edits, and that you review Wikipedia:Edit warring, as you are at risk of being blocked if you continue down that path. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 15:50, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Hobbes090414, do not continue to edit material on the Arab–Israeli conflict, until you have at least 500 edits or you will find yourself the subject of a noticeboard discussion very fast. This is your final warning. TarnishedPath^talk 22:57, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Saira Rao, you may be blocked from editing. Drmies (talk) 20:51, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only the headline of the Westworld article says Rao's quote refers to Israelis as "bloodthirsty genocidal ghouls". The article itself lists her correct quote from Threads: "Zionists are starting to panic that more and more of the world sees them for the bloodthirsty genocidal ghouls that they are." If anything, the article is not a reliable source, because Zionists and Israelis are not the same thing. Not all Zionists are Israelis or even Jewish (Joe Biden has described himself as a staunch Zionist). Hobbes090414 (talk) 21:31, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's one instance; apparently there were four. Quoting from the article: "Speaking through a spokesperson, the agency says many people it works with support Palestine, but Rao’s words went too far. The CAA cites four specific posts that it says crossed the line into “anti-Semitism and hate speech.”" Mind you, our article now says, IMO correctly, that she was accused of making antisemitic remarks, not that the made them. You don't have to argue the difference between anti-Zionism and antisemitism to me, or to invoke President Biden; it's about what the source says. If you think it's a weak source, you can take that up on the talk page--but if your argument is that the publication doesn't distinguish between anti-Zionism and antisemitism when it merely reports on the events, you'll have a hard time. I don't see any editorializing in that article; it's not an opinion piece; they're reporting the comments from both parties. Drmies (talk) 23:26, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

Hello, I'm BlueboyLINY. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Billie Joe Armstrong, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! BlueboyLINY (talk) 00:01, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore the above. As MOS:LEADCITE shows, you do not need to cite material in the lead when it is merely summarizing properly sourced material in the article body, which is all your edits did. I have restored your edits. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 03:16, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]