User talk:Isabela ciao
Welcome!
[edit]Hi Isabela ciao! I noticed your contributions to Terra nullius and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
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:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! signed, Rosguill talk 03:07, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
[edit]
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.
I don't see any issues with your edits at No man's land, but technically they were against the above rules. Please avoid editing topics relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict, including content about the Arab-Israeli content in articles otherwise not primarily about that topic (like No man's land), until you reach 500 edits and thirty days on this account. signed, Rosguill talk 03:19, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
[edit]You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, 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.
Just letting you know you're editing in this topic area too ... It's not quite as tricky as the Arab-Israeli conflict (a lot less of the EC restrictions Rosguill alluded to) but that's not to say there aren't minefields and third rails there too. Daniel Case (talk) 03:52, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
Nomination of George Santos biographical misrepresentations for deletion
[edit]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Santos biographical misrepresentations until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.Daniel Case (talk) 03:47, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
(I'm sorry to do this since you're a fairly new editor and I know you mean well (yes, the article is getting unmanageably long) but as I noted at the AfD page we had a similar attempt to split off something like this a couple of months back that was also deleted and the consensus at the talk page has been to not do this for a while until things settle down and we can find a more BLP-compliant way to do this. A shame; you've worked very hard and tried to do a lot right. Don't let this discourage you from being bold. Daniel Case (talk) 03:47, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
December 2023
[edit]
Hello, I'm Woodroar. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on 19 Kids and Counting, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Woodroar (talk) 16:07, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- You lost me. What exactly was the concern? I saw sufficient reference in the content. Isabela ciao (talk) 16:10, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Claims about living persons must be supported by reliable, secondary sources. All of the sources given were primary sources written by others (i.e., not by each individual) or low-quality secondary sources. Woodroar (talk) 16:15, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- The link is to the show's official website. Doesn't get better than that. Isabela ciao (talk) 16:29, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- Claims about living persons must be supported by reliable, secondary sources. All of the sources given were primary sources written by others (i.e., not by each individual) or low-quality secondary sources. Woodroar (talk) 16:15, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Blocked as a sockpuppet
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. UtherSRG (talk) 13:35, 4 January 2024 (UTC)