User talk:Johorean Boy

Welcome!

Hello, Johorean Boy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Muar Town), 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, followed by your question, 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! Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:59, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Muar Town)

A tag has been placed on Muar Town), requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It is a redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer. (See section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 12:59, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User page

Please, remove the insulting content from your ~~talk~~ user page. --Wüstenfuchs 07:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed it - hosting death threats/death wishes on your user page is not in keeping with the collegial approach we adopt here at Wikipedia. If you repeat such messages, you should expect to find yourself blocked. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:18, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I have removed the line in question, which clearly violates Wikipedia's userpage guidelines. Please do not restore it or you will be blocked from editing. Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:20, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Güiza

Hi there JB, AL from Portugal here,

i know this article has been vandalized, but this is not my case OK? The club's name in Wikipedia is Johor FC not what you have written, please leave it as it is. Also, no need for a separate section in the club career with the Malaysian club, as the player still belongs to Getafe.

Thank you - --AL (talk) 15:05, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

December 2012

Please do not add or change content, as you did to Darul Takzim FC, without verifying it by citing reliable sources. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Giant Snowman 08:49, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Johor FA. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Giant Snowman 13:08, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

February 2013

I remove some content because he does not give a reliable source. --Johorean Boy (talk) 04:30, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Warning removed. Arctic Kangaroo 04:36, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Adding unbased information on Operation Protective Edge

Hello. Please stop adding Hamas' claims as if they were true. Nothing they say can be trusted. It is ok to report that thay claim this and that, but until there is a source saying that their claim is true, it is not true. Feel free to use the talk page to express your point. If you keep adding false information to the page, I will have to request the administrators to block you. WarKosign (talk) 14:27, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Block Notice

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Operation Protective Edge. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

Also, please note that due to active arbitration remedies this article only allows one revert per 24 hours. Mike V • Talk 14:32, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

Reference for UNICEF comment

Hi. Regarding your edit here. worldbulletin.net is not WP:RS, news source. It is just reporting what it heard from elsewhere. Need to find original Al-Jazeera interview, or some reliable source reporting it. Kingsindian (talk) 20:51, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 10:40, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit on UNICEF chief about children in Gaza

Hi. Your edit violated copyright, since it was copy-pasted from the source. I have rewritten it this time, but keep this in mind for the future. Also, please do not keep adding that paragraph without discussing on talk page. The paragraph is now added to the "Civilian deaths" section. Also, worldbulletin.net is not WP:RS. Kingsindian (talk) 12:04, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop edit warring

I have left a comment on page here. Kingsindian (talk) 20:53, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD 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. Kingsindian (talk) 14:08, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring

You continued to edit-war despite being warned of the discretionary sanctions and despite being warned about edit-warring in particular. If this behaviour persists, I will impose sanctions to stop it. Consider this a final warning. Discuss controversial changes on the talk page, do not just reinstate them without a consensus to do so. Huon (talk) 15:44, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Johorean Boy and Huon: this is the diff of the last violation of the consensus.

August 2014

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for edit-warring at 2014 Israel–Gaza conflict, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and then appeal your block using the instructions there. Huon (talk) 23:06, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In March 2010, ArbCom adopted a procedure instructing administrators as follows: "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." Administrators who reverse this block without the clear authorisation described in that procedure will be summarily desysopped.

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 14:41, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]