User talk:Thewildshoe

Welcome!

Hello, Thewildshoe!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Doug Weller talk 13:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions for the Arab-Israeli dispute area

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 the Arab–Israeli conflict. 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.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

Doug Weller talk 13:32, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You must follow these page-specific restrictions until you have 500 edits and have been here 30 days

For the purposes of editing restrictions in the ARBPIA topic area, the "area of conflict" shall be defined as encompassing

the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted ("primary articles"), and
edits relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict, to pages and discussions in all namespaces with the exception of userspace ("related content")

Also,

500/30 Rule: All IP editors, users with fewer than 500 edits, and users with less than 30 days' tenure are prohibited from editing content within the area of conflict. On primary articles, this prohibition is preferably to be enforced by use of extended confirmed protection (ECP) but this is not mandatory. On pages with related content, or on primary articles where ECP is not feasible, the 500/30 Rule may be enforced by other methods, including page protection, reverts, blocks, the use of pending changes, and appropriate edit filters. Reverts made solely to enforce the 500/30 Rule are not considered edit warring.

The sole exceptions to this prohibition are:

1. Editors who are not eligible to be extended-confirmed may use the Talk: namespace to post constructive comments and make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive. Talk pages where disruption occurs may be managed by any of the methods noted in paragraph b). This exception does not apply to other internal project discussions such as AfDs, WikiProjects, RfCs, noticeboard discussions, etc.

2. Editors who are not eligible to be extended-confirmed may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by editors who do not meet the criteria is permitted but not required.

3. One Revert Restriction (1RR): Each editor is limited to one revert per page per 24 hours on any edits made to content within the area of conflict. Reverts made to enforce the 500/30 Rule are exempt from the provisions of this motion. Also, the normal exemptions apply. Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator.

Note that this means your edits on such pages (which you aren't yet eligible to make) may be reverted by anyone at any time. These restrictions are stricter than those in most other areas because of the problems that we've had in this area. Doug Weller talk 13:32, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the year since Doug posted this message above, the restrictions were tightened so that only "Edit Requests" are allowed by editors with fewer than 500 edits in artilces with EC restrictions. Therefore I had to "hat" that discussion you commenced. I suggest that you frame your input into an edit request. After you have 500 edits, those restrictions will lapse. See this link[1] for the new restriction. Coretheapple (talk) 22:27, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I most certainly did suggest an edit. I suggested to add the use of the word "massacre".

Do I need to suggest a specific edit to add the word "massacre" in a specific line?

Thewildshoe (talk) 22:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you need to be specific, and use a specific form, such as the editor did in the discussion immediately following. I responded also on my talk page. I suggest you take your time and craft your edit request carefully. As I said previously, I agree with you on the substance of your request. Coretheapple (talk) 23:04, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Thank you. Thewildshoe (talk) 23:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I may raise the point myself, but tbh I find this whole subject area exhausting. Coretheapple (talk) 15:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that maybe I'm being too rigid. You did indeed make a request for an edit. I've unhatted the discussion. Coretheapple (talk) 22:46, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ARBECR

You have already been made aware above of restrictions around AI editing. Per WP:ARBECR, you are entitled only to make edit requests at article talk pages in that regard. That is why your edits are being reverted. In particular, you have no standing to make this edit either. Please make sure you comply with these restrictions going forward, thank you for your attention. Selfstudier (talk) 22:41, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The edit you've reverted was in a user's talk page, not an ARBPIA topic area. Please refrain from abusing your editing, any attempts to continue this violation will be dealt with in the appropriate Wikipedia channels. This is a notice before taking actions. Please do not misuse Wikipedia protocols again. Thewildshoe (talk) 16:39, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot discuss the AI conflict anywhere, you may only make edit requests at article talk pages. Note that the editor whose talk page you edited reverted that edit citing WP:ARBECR as well. Selfstudier (talk) 16:42, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's no violation in adding a topic on a user's talk page. Don't dig your hole any deeper, and don't try it again. Thewildshoe (talk) 17:00, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At both my talk page and the talk page of the editor referred above, you state that I reverted material on that editor's talk page, which is false. Selfstudier (talk) 17:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You might not be aware, but administrators have logs of these edits, and changing the name of the editor, retroactively to a nameless "MediaWiki message delivery" just increases the severity of your violations. Attempting to hide your actions is highly incriminating and indicates you are aware you are doing something wrong.

Denial is futile. You will be handled as well for your misconduct.

Thewildshoe (talk) 17:17, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong, and your edits to Talk:2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel were also violations as well as personal attacks. I'm going to be generous as you are very new and block you for 24 hours as a normal Admin action, not logged at AE. Doug Weller talk 17:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I advise you not to "join in", as it will make you complicit in the misconduct.

Thewildshoe (talk) 17:18, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: Feeling 24 hours is inadequate. Best. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's understandable that all of you feel attacked. People getting called out for potential misconduct could generate that feeling. You're welcomed to do whatever you desire to, within your powers. It will only serve as evidence of further misconduct in my appeals. Thewildshoe (talk) 20:22, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I never said I felt attacked. Please reread the WP:GAB. Hopefully, you can compose an unblock request that addresses the reasons for your block. And which does not attack other users. Thanks, -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't imagine any of the editors posting here could feel attacked. Bemused perhaps, even amused is more likely. Doug Weller talk 10:04, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for Ct violations and personal attacks. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Doug Weller talk 17:08, 18 March 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am following protocol WP:ANI as I've found a chronic abuser of editing user:Iskandar323, and I've noticed him on his talk page as a way to attempt to resolve it before appealing to moderators. My notice has been deleted from his talk page by user:Selfstudier which then left a message on my talk page, citing the notice violates WP:ARBECR, which of course is irrelevant, and then a 3rd user popped up to ban me for 24 hours. All for calling out a chronic abuser and following Wikipedia protocol. This is against Wikipedia's purpose and spirit and is incivil behavior, at best. Thank you for reading. Edit after user:Selfstudier added a remark on 17:53, 18 March 2024: I refer you to his own words in my talk page on the topic he himself added: "You have already been made aware above of restrictions around AI editing. Per WP:ARBECR, you are entitled only to make edit requests at article talk pages in that regard. That is why your edits are being reverted. In particular, you have no standing to make this edit either. Please make sure you comply with these restrictions going forward, thank you for your attention. 6:41 pm, Yesterday (UTC−4)" Thewildshoe (talk) 17:28, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please describe concisely and clearly how your edits merited a block, what you would do differently, and what constructive edits you would make. Please read Wikipedia's Guide to appealing blocks for more information. Thanks.. Please be aware that further personal attacks could result in the lengthening of the block. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:45, 18 March 2024 (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.

My notice has been deleted from his talk page by user:Selfstudier This statement is false, the edit was reverted by the owner of the talk page here. Imo, this user is WP:NOTHERE. Selfstudier (talk) 17:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 70 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Doug Weller talk 21:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is because of your use of your appeal to continue your attacks. Doug Weller talk 21:51, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]