User talk:Tomwalker89

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Hello, Tomwalker89, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{Help me}} on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Please sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing four tildes (~~~~); our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

We're so glad you're here! Meatsgains (talk) 17:52, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one or more pages into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The text has been removed as it is unsourced,tweak but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 07:23, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Hi again, Tom. I see you have again been copying Wikipedia material without proper attrobution, per User:Doug Weller above, despite previous warnings from User:Diannaa. You did attempt to give attribution here, and I give you credit for that, but it wasn't sufficient. Diannaa showed you in this post (which you have now removed) how to do it so that it complies with our rules for proper attribution. Another thing, also, is that you tend to move text that is not very relevant in the new place. Your move of text from Jian Yang (politician) to Chinese New Zealanders is an example of that — it's out of place and not highly relevant. I've removed it. At the very least, it would need some context (as well as proper formatting).

The text you added to four articles today including Amine Gemayel is a copyright violation from Sputnik News. (You had already added the same to Lebanon–Syria relations in September.) And again, the text doesn't fit in most of the places you put it. I have blocked you indefinitely as a serial copyright violator. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen | talk 09:34, 12 October 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Tomwalker89 (talk) 09:37, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unblock | reason=I'm Sorry I didn't know. I really love using Wikipedia. I will stop doing these mistakes. Tomwalker89 (talk) 09:38, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Tomwalker89 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

if you block me for a day or a week I would and will understand but forever? No. Tomwalker89 (talk) 09:42, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

I've changed my mind, because the text that was added to Amine Gemayel and other articles was a direct quote, via Wikileaks. I've unblocked, but please consider the other things I said. If you persist in lifting text from Wikipedia articles and putting it into other Wikipedia articles (where it often doesn't go very well) without correct attribution, you will be re-blocked. Bishonen | talk 11:17, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, how did you not know after all the warnings? And also, you keep adding stuff that simply doesn't fit. I'm afraid that looks like a competence issue. I'm also a little concerned that it takes a block to make you speak civilly[1] or to respond at all. But I will leave it to the reviewing admin. They may agree to shorten the block. Indefinite doesn't mean infinite. Bishonen | talk 09:52, 12 October 2017 (UTC). PS: and now I've unblocked, see above. Bishonen | talk 11:18, 12 October 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Thank You, God bless You. Tomwalker89 (talk) 11:21, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I will NOW start doing Attribution for the pages Now. Tomwalker89 (talk) 11:28, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're editing in this area so you need to know this

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Need for sources

Even if you are copying from other articles, you need to source any contentious material, see WP:VERIFY and WP:RS. If you are copying material with a source, please make sure the source backs the material.

And of course never add text to sourced text unless your text is backed by the source. Doug Weller talk 13:11, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Doug Weller talk 13:12, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bishonen, Doug Weller, please see this. Tomwalker, you are WAY too close to the source; you need to take a lesson in paraphrasing. Moonriddengirl, I know we have an online tutorial on this--can you point the way? Drmies (talk) 14:31, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bosnian war

I removed part of your additions, I hope this explains why. Basically the source you added is accusing the Saudi of sending money to Al-Qaeda, through a Bosnian 'cover charity', but it does NOT say that the money went to any AQ activities in Bosnia. I also removed it from the 'foreign fighters' article since it was about weapons/money rather than about 'fighters'. Pincrete (talk) 20:15, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Tomwalker89. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]