User talk:Adonnus

Welcome!

Hello, Adonnus, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Aden Wiedijk, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. 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}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Top Jim (talk) 09:14, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Aden Wiedijk

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Aden Wiedijk, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Top Jim (talk) 09:14, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

November 2010

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Aden Wiedijk. Please use the {{hangon}} template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion, and make your case on the page's talk page. Thank you. Top Jim (talk) 09:28, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from pages that you have created yourself, as you did with this edit to Aden Wiedijk. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Anna Lincoln 09:29, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning; the next time you remove a speedy deletion notice from a page you have created yourself, as you did at Aden Wiedijk, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Top Jim (talk) 09:33, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

November 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to John Flett, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by ClueBot NG.

Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: John Flett was changed by Adonnus (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.806514 on 2010-11-26T03:07:36+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 03:07, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

September 2016

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Zayn Malik, you may be blocked from editing. WP:BLP vandalism like that will not be tolerated. Majora (talk) 02:52, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Second Fishy Crusade ‎, you may be blocked from editing. Sjö (talk) 07:30, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Speedy Deletion

Hello, Adonnus. Thank you for helping to build Wikipedia-- the world's largest free content encyclopedia.

I'm sorry, but this has been deleted as meeting one or more of the Categories for Speedy Deletion.

Generally, articles are speedily deleted when there is no assertion of significance or they fall into things to avoid or what Wikipedia is not.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia-- subjects must meet notability guidelines with reliable sources providing verifiable information. That generally means someone unconnected with the subject needs to have written a great deal about the subject.

Sometimes articles are deleted because they contain content copyrighted elsewhere. Such content can be used as a source of information, but the content here must be completely rewritten from scratch.

Some articles contain material written in a promotional tone. These must often be written from scratch. They are vigorously deleted.

Any content that is negative in tone and unsourced or which is disparaging will also be vigorously deleted.

Any deficiencies with notability, sourcing, or things to avoid should be remedied before reposting as they can lead to repeated deletions.

For test edits, click Adonnus/sandbox

If you want to try again, please use the Article Wizard to guide you through the creation process.

You may find this tool useful: Google custom search

If you have verifiable information from reliable sources that show subject does meet notability requirements Let me know.
CONTENT IN ARTICLES NEEDS TO BE RELIABLY SOURCED.

Dloh cierekim 08:15, 23 April 2017 (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.

== Welcome! ==

Hi Adonnus! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

I've noticed that you've expressed an interest in the Arab/Israel conflict. Unfortunately, due to a history of conflict and disruptive editing it has been designated a contentious topic and is subject to some strict rules.

The rule that affects you most as new or IP editor is the prohibition on making any edit related to the Arab/Israel conflict unless you are logged into an account and that account is at least 30 days old and has made at least 500 edits.

This prohibition is broadly construed, so it includes edits such as adding the reaction of a public figure concerning the conflict to their article or noting the position of a company or organization as it relates to the conflict.

The exception to this rule is that you may request a specific change to an article on the talk page of that article or at this page. Please ensure that your requested edit complies with our neutral point of view and reliable sourcing policies, and if the edit is about a living person our policies on biographies of living people as well.

Any edits you make contrary to these rules are likely to be reverted, and repeated violations can lead to your being blocked from editing.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Selfstudier (talk) 17:31, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gaza casualties in infobox

Hi. Regarding what you said here, your Talk edit will probably get deleted. Not warranted in my eyes, but besides the previous item in your own Talk page, read the other sections in that Template's Talk page to get more background on that. In short, some editors believe you have to be WP:XCON to actively participate there, though it's not enforced uniformly.

To your point, that number isn't civilians. It's "unspecified", for obvious reasons. There are milder edit suggestions there but without the participation of XCON users it would be a problem as well. galenIgh 22:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is not quite correct IMO. The number is civilians, if you expand it, as these are the GHM figures which don't include any combatants. However this information isn't there without expanding. Adonnus (talk) 11:02, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not civilians, but mixed, else they'd call it "civilians" as it's to their benefit. I thought that's what you were driving at. galenIgh 15:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, the infobox itself refutes this argument:

Per Gaza Health Ministry, the total number of deaths are 34,097 including:

14,000+ children

9,220+ women

1,049 elderly

364 paramedics and medical staff

152 UN staff

200+ journalists

All civilians. As for the ones who aren't listed... it's left up in the air whether they were civilian men or not. Adonnus (talk) 11:58, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Refutes how? As you say, it doesn't say anything about the men. galenIgh 01:30, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The implication is they are all civilians because civilians only are listed. The fine print is, there might be some combatants among them. However that should be made more clear. Adonnus (talk) 17:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The group of editors that guard that article insist on purposefully keeping that number ambiguous (or rather, suggestive of it being all civilians). And you don't have enough edits to be eligible to edit directly.

There are also other problems with the figures or the way they are presented. galenIgh 20:22, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is why I wanted to raise a discussion about it. So at least they can justify it. Adonnus (talk) 23:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]