User talk:LiamFitzGilbert

Belated Welcome

Hello, LiamFitzGilbert, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia. I hope you like the place and decide to become a productive contributor. You can find your contributionshere. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- The Red Pen of Doom 17:55, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Murray Bookchin

HI LiamFitzGilbert -- You just made a change to the Murray Bookchin article which you checked with a "minor edit" flag and described as "restore section accidentally deleted". Can you please identify where this was previously, and how it was deleted? Because it looks like new content to me, and I hope that you are not putting in new content of a highly political nature that is described in such a way to hide what has happened. --Lquilter (talk) 12:53, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the history... http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Murray_Bookchin&diff=497752594&oldid=495449029 LiamFitzGilbert (talk) 12:57, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page

Hi Liam,

You've inserted some material that has been challenged by other editors. In such cases, it is necessary to participate in a talk page discussion to push and back up your point, and hopefully gain consensus for the edit you're making. Once consensus is made, you are free to make the edit.

However, you can not simply revert and reinsert the material while such a discussion is taking place. It is against Wikipedia policies, and can have negative consequences, which we wouldn't want.

Hope it helps. Let me know if you have any questions.

--Jethro B 03:33, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions‎, like all articles related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, is subject to discretionary arbitration sanctions. Specifically, the article is subject to a one-revert restriction (1RR), which means an editor may make no more than one revert in any 24-hour period. Please see the box at the top of Talk:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions‎ for further information.

Your last edit was a second revert in less than one hour. Please undo it or you may be blocked. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:ANEW#User:LiamFitzGilbert reported by User:Malik Shabazz (Result: ). — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:54, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Warning: Discretionary sanctions on all Israel/Palestine-related articles

As a result of an arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, broadly understood. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad editing restrictions, described here and below.

Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.
The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.
Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.
Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently WP:AE), or the Committee.

These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.

Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary.

This notice is only effective if given by an uninvolved administrator and logged here.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:16, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2012

To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for violating 1RR on the page Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and follow the instructions there to appeal your block. --Bbb23 (talk) 12:42, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice to administrators: In a March 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."

Translation of Bacheh-baazi

Hello... I'm a native Persian... When you add "baz" at the end of a word, like "ahang-baz" it means someone who is in the business or interested in Music. Or "film-baz" or "Computer-baz" meaning "Computer geek" or something similar... -baz can be added at the end of almost any noun meaning "being interested in" or "being in the business of" them... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pro translator (talk • contribs) 18:17, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Liberalism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Enlightenment (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) 09:45, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of Ledenierhomme (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:52, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]