User talk:Yestyest2000

Welcome!

Hello, Yestyest2000, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Yestyest2000! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 3 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Julio Lamas - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 06:17, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Helms Foundation Player of the Year reference?

I noticed that you are the creator of the Helms Foundation College Basketball Player of the Year on Wikipedia (history), and the same article on hoopedia.nba.com (history). However, on neither article did you cite where you got your information. I've searched through the NCAA online men's basketball media guide and found no Helms Player of the Year list, and nor did I find a list identical to the one you posted when I Googled it. The only list I found from a third-party source is this, which only somewhat mirrors your list.

Would you please be so kind as to providing me with the reference that you used so that I know where it came from? If not I'm probably going to have to revamp the Wikipedia article to correspond it with the link I provided (and do the same for {{Helms Foundation College Basketball Player of the Year}}). Thanks. Jrcla2 (talk) 14:33, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, we have resolved the issue at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College Basketball#NEED HELP: Helms Foundation POY reference(s). Jrcla2 (talk) 01:06, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some friendly advice

The material you are suggesting you are going to edit around (concerning the Arab-Israeli conflict), regardless of which article you edit the material into, has general sanctions which are applicable to that topic area. I suggest you make yourself aware of the general sanctions which can be found at WP:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel_articles_4#ARBPIA_General_Sanctions. Kind Regards, TarnishedPath^talk 09:28, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unsolicited Suggestion: Take a Breath

I very, very strongly suggest that you take a few days & breathe. The sarcasm in your comments at Talk:List of Islamist terrorist attacks comes thru very clearly: You can't just assert that you've changed someone's mind, & you surely know that. If you make the change on Monday without further meaningful conversation, some editor will revert it (again, this is not a threat: I won't revert the change—it's just very predictable from the history of the page that someone will revert the edit). Given the reversion restrictions on the topic, you'll either end up right back on the Talk page, or you'll get into an edit war. You're creating a record that can very easily be read to demonstrate that you don't take the assumption of good faith seriously, & furthermore may be taken as evidence that you're not acting in good faith. If you get yourself a topic ban or other editing restriction it won't matter whether or not you were right.

There is another, more effective way to handle this which in the long run is also faster: Accept that the change takes time (there's no rule, but a week or two weeks for comment is not uncommon on contentious topics) & interact with people civilly. Nine times out of ten, if you're angry while writing on a Wikipedia Talk page, you're really just getting in your own way. Pathawi (talk) 16:13, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Talk:List of Islamist terrorist attacks. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:28, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

Looking at the edit history of this account, I recognize that it is recently renewed editing after a long gap. I'm not sure how much policies and guidelines have changed in that time -- certainly I've seen some change all along the way, but it's hard to keep track of how it accumulated. Seeing your recent editing history on the Susan Sarandon, I'm going to suggest that you review the essay on the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle of article editing, and also our guidelines on avoiding trying to combine sources to make a point that neither made. Understanding that should help you on discussions of the edits you want in that article. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 08:02, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

truth matters, let's go to the talk page. hopefully enough wiki editor value truth over falsehoods. Yestyest2000 (talk) 08:08, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for violations of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy. 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 ~~~~}}. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:16, 22 November 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.

Selfstudier (talk) 19:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, 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.

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 09:52, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed 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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]