User talk:Batsquatch

December 2020

Hello, I'm Sjö. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Corbyn wreath-laying controversy have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Sjö (talk) 13:11, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from attempting to make unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been disallowed by an edit filter. If you would like to experiment, please use the your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 13:39, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was not vandalizing anything.

Isabel Jeanne (talk) 02:57, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ARBPIA notification

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.

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.

Please note that one of the restrictions is that you may not edit in articles related to the Arab-Israeli conflict until you have been registered for 30 days and have made 500 edits. Zero^talk 04:44, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How will I know when I've made 500 edits? Isabel Jeanne (talk) 05:16, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Look in your preferences. Probably you ought to read Balfour Declaration as well.Selfstudier (talk) 12:57, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you have nothing better to do with your time than argue with a 17 year old girl I suggest you find a hobby. Batsquatch (talk) 17:59, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Minor

I came across one of your edits and was surpriced that it was marked as a minor edit, when it most certainly was not. Looking at your contributions, I find that you mark virtually all your edits as minor. That is not correct. Please read WP:MINOR about when to use and when not to use the "Minor" marking. Regards! --T*U (talk) 11:43, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

Hello, I'm David O. Johnson. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Otzma Yehudit have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. David O. Johnson (talk) 05:42, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm David O. Johnson. I wanted to let you know that your edit here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baruch_Marzel&diff=prev&oldid=1008328759 to the Baruch Marzel article was reverted because you removed reliably-sourced info. Thanks, David O. Johnson (talk) 00:49, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Arabic Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. In addition to removing sources from the article, you also used the deceptive edit summary I added in missing information when in reality you were removing information. --T*U (talk) 23:55, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

Hello, I'm Skllagyook. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Khazar hypothesis of Ashkenazi ancestry have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Skllagyook (talk) 23:55, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was constructive and I would like some actual reasoning and examples as to why y'all felt the need to undo my edit. Batsquatch (talk) 01:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am referring to this edit (here: [[1]]) deketing (and relevant and helpfull) information regarding the ancestry of Ashkenazi Jews for no apparent reason, and then adding your own unsourced personal commentary to the lead. It was not constructive, violated Wikipedia policies against WP:OR (and personal commentary/editorialization) among others, and seemed to make little sense (the removal of sourced information was unexplained and goes against WP:CONSENSUS). Our job as Wikipedia editors is to follow what is explicit in the sources, not to add personal inferences of commentary. And your edit summary describing it as "adding information for accuracy" was confusing and misleading. Your following edit to the page (here: [[2]]) though perhaps not as concerning as the first, also does not seem to be an improvement, and seems to remove some helpfull nuance regarding the history and reception of the theory that was present before. Skllagyook (talk) 01:48, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

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

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

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 need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Shrike (talk) 11:03, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AE next

I see that you have gotten an ARBPIA notification above, still you make edits to ARBPIA -pages, without having 500 edits. Please stop. If you continue making edits like this, expect to see yourself at WP:AE, Huldra (talk) 23:04, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And still. Zero^talk 00:27, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021

Hi,

My name is David O. Johnson and I wanted to let you know that I reverted this edit to the Otzma Yehudit article here [3] as the wording was misleading. Thanks. David O. Johnson (talk) 01:27, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How? Batsquatch (talk) 03:18, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edits related to the Arab-Israeli conflict

Hi Batsquatch, I recently reverted edits you made to Ilhan Omar, as much of the content is covered by WP:ARBPIA4. I see that you have been warned multiple times not to edit content related to the Arab-Israeli conflict before reaching 500 edits. Is this a case of your not understanding the rule still, or are you in disagreement with the rule itself? Firefangledfeathers (talk) 15:29, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ilhan Omar. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Generalrelative (talk) 02:19, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 2021

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 articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. 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.

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.

Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:25, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 2021

To enforce an arbitration decision you have been blocked temporarily from editing. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

Your edit at Political views of Albert Einstein was a clear violation of the 30/500 restriction regarding the Arab-Israel conflict that has been explained to you several times. I warned you about this on my talk page very recently. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:00, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

Hello, Batsquatch. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

September 2021

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

– bradv^🍁 19:00, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why I was blocked. I was waiting for a block to end and have not edited wikipedia since. I edit from my local library, so its possible I forget to log out on wikipedia, but I don't see anything.