User talk:Frankystein3

Hello, I'm Joppa Chong. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. You really should reconsider and change your editing behaviour. --Joppa Chong (talk) 15:27, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to International military intervention against ISIL has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: International military intervention against ISIL was changed by Frankystein3 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.8929 on 2018-09-16T18:40:36+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 18:40, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to List of totalitarian regimes while logged out. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting and doing so may result in your account being blocked from editing. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. DrKay (talk) 17:40, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 2019

Please do not add or change content, as you did at List of totalitarian regimes, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. DrKay (talk) 20:21, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't shout in edit summaries. I removed your content because it was not sourced. When you restored it, you added new sources. You should just say 'now sourced' not compound your initial error by being rude. DrKay (talk) 20:47, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:56, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019

Hello, I'm Julietdeltalima. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Julietdeltalima (talk) 20:00, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020

This iS to your recent disruptive editing on the article List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll, where you have erased multiple sourced information and added un-sourced contents based purely on your personal judgement. All your edits have been reverted. Also you are suspected of using multi-accounts which can result in permanent ban User talk:Jaymaniyar, check Wikipedia:Sock puppetry. Next time if you cause such disruptive edits you will be reported and may be banned from editing. Dilbaggg (talk) 07:58, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 8

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of genocides by death toll, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hazara (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:19, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020

Persistent disruptive editing, removal of sourced information and adding unsourced and unreliable contents at List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll. Also note, the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic death toll is not part of WW1 death toll, pandemics are natural disasters, death tolls here are for those killed in action, if you include pandemic, then the Black Death pandemic can be addeed to the Mongol Conquests which would bring death toll above 200 million. Pandemics are never considered part of war death, no WP:RS. This is however not the reason you are warned for, you have removed sourced information and added unsourced, unreliable contents which is vandalism and next time you mat be reported and blocked. Dilbaggg (talk) 12:37, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:59, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Criticism of the Quran, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. This is in addition to your similar editing on Criticism of Islam, which presented WP:NPOV issues in terms of the introduction of less than neutral subtitles. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:33, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Criticism of Mohammed, you may be blocked from editing.

To cite a source in support of your personal opinion, representing as saying something it does not say, is a serious violation of Wikipedia principles. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 07:45, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It DOES say what I said. The only difference is that my quote is a general observation after reviewing lengthily the source, whereas the direct link to the source itself merely shows ONE EXAMPLE of the point I'm making. But very well, I'll edit it accordingly, and I expect not to be threatened for *DEMONSTRABLY* writing the truth. Frankystein3 (talk) 13:19, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Edit warring over multiple articles. Doug Weller talk 14:16, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Very unfair, given that it is my edits which are being reverted wtihout just cause. I will take it to the Talk page nonetheless. Frankystein3 (talk) 14:18, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Talk:Criticism of Islam while logged out. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting and doing so may result in your account being blocked from editing. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 18:20, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Talk:Criticism of Muhammad. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Doug Weller talk 06:35, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions notice

Hi Frankystein3. Please see the standard notice below about heightened conduct standards in a sensitive topic area. I know we're involved in a content dispute right now, and it's therefore hard for notices like these not appear hostile. I want to emphasize the "does not imply that there are any issues" part of the notice.

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 Muhammad. 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.

Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:25, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't use edit summaries to attack other editors

Please don't use edit summaries to sneer at and assume bad faith of other editors, as you did here and here. Wikipedia is not a battleground. Bishonen | tålk 16:36, 6 June 2022 (UTC).[reply]

How can I not assume bad faith when the reasons given for undoing my contributions are bogus? Frankystein3 (talk) 22:27, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus is a matter of opinion. Are you sure your opinions about Wikipedia matters trump the opinions of Doug Weller, a very experienced editor? Also, please read Wikipedia:Assume good faith. It's a foundational principle here. And finally, even if you disagree with somebody's reasons, you are not entitled to sneer and be rude. It's the kind of thing you can be blocked for if you persist in it. Civility in editor interactions is policy. Bishonen | tålk 22:56, 6 June 2022 (UTC).[reply]

@Bishonen And it doesn't stop. See the post I just warned them about at Talk:Criticism of Muhammad saying "It seems to me that YOUR interest is not "building an encyclopedia", but rather protecting your own tribal interests at all costs (contributor to Palestine and Arab world, what a coincidence!), or in other words, good old apologetics". And I missed another accusing Iskander of lying. Doug Weller talk 06:39, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. Blocked. Bishonen | tålk 07:25, 9 June 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Requesting some article expansion help

Greetings @ Frankystein3,

Hi, I am User:Bookku, I find information and knowledge gaps create Drafts, try to recruit draft expanding editors and promote drafts articles for further expansion.

Requesting your visit to following article/ drafts and help expand the same if any of these interests you.

Islamic advice literature

Draft:Intellectual discourse over re-mosqueing of Hagia Sophia

User:Boud/Draft:WikiProject Peace (This is draft project by another user)

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 01:22, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Wow, protecting your own tribal interests, etc, after being warned that civility is policy here? You have been blocked indefinitely for persistent personal attacks and disruptive editing. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} Bishonen | tålk 07:14, 9 June 2022 (UTC).[reply]